The light at the end of the tunnel, the peacefulness, your life flashing before your eyes—it’s all been documented thoroughly in pop culture. What usually gets left out, though, are the potential scientific explanations for what happens to your brain during a brush with death.
Hosted by: Hank Green
———-
Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon:
———-
Dooblydoo thanks go to the following Patreon supporters:
Kevin Bealer, Mark Terrio-Cameron, KatieMarie Magnone, Inerri, D.A. Noe, Charles Southerland, Fatima Iqbal,
سلطان الخليفي, Nicholas Smith, Tim Curwick, Scott Satovsky Jr, Philippe von Bergen, Bella Nash, Chris Peters, Patrick D. Ashmore, Piya Shedden, Charles George
———-
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook:
Twitter:
Tumblr:
Instagram:
———-
Sources:
it seems he only considers less plausible "scientific" explanations because he is afraid of what the scientific community will say if he believes in something spiritual.
I totally agree with this explanation. The best so far. hahaha.
Or a fifth option, its a supernatural occurrence in which no amount of science could explain it away nor dismiss the growing amount of divine encounters by religious, atheists, and spirit people.
How do you know this? It’s impossible to know for sure.
Science is so slow to understand things. Like back then when doctors would bleed patients because they reasoned it was good for the patients that where sick. Until they realized the idea of hemorrhage. Science is slow
Sorry dude; inexperienced guy with no direct knowledge on the topic. I love that you’re creating 10 second clips about nothing. Like regional news with barraging us with chaos, murder, and violence, not helpful. Be a subject matter expert on a topic vs. one who reads subject titles only, showing a picture; no depth.
Explain miracle healing
(Yes this is a very long comment and may overwhelm the non-reader who prefers only YouTube videos, but for those accustomed to reading you might find this interesting and informative. It is an examination of a near-death experience as if it were a case in a court of law and help some understand the reasoning behind the skepticism faced when making such NDE claims. I wrote it. It's mine and I would be happy to argue any refutations to it. It is opinion, not fact, and only follows the Laws of Logic as a guide, not any preexisting belief or political agenda.)
Suppose we took this evidence of a near death experience to court and presented legal arguments based on the testimony of the witness. The witness being the one who claimed to have the experience, who in our scenario would be the defendant who is defending their claim. Now let's pretend that I am the prosecuting attorney for the State and give my opening statement to the court before proceeding with the trial. This is NOT a refutation of the witness' claim, but establishing the expectations of the defense to present their case according to the law. In this case, the law being the Laws of Logic since no criminal laws obviously apply here. But some framework must be established to test the validity of their testimony against a reasonable precedence. So, here is a proposed opening statement by the prosecution presented before the judge who, in this case, the judge is our own reason:
Ladies and Gentleman of the Jury. Your Honor. The State now wishes to proceed with our opening statement in the case of "Our Reason" vs "NDE and the Afterlife"
What is Death? What is Life?
Can we be both alive and dead at the same time? Can we coexist with death? And let's be clear the difference between being alive and being dead. Being alive we have thought, memories, emotions, sensation, awareness, and a body with senses in which we can experience all these elements of life. Of being alive. So is there any single one of these aspects of being alive which the Law of Contradiction does not apply, thus breaking the law itself?
If the law still holds, then no aspect of life can be a part of death. And death is the absence of life by definition. And so if we attempt an alternate definition of death to escape the Law of Contradiction regarding our coexistence with it, what is the epistemic discernment we must use to do so? Empirical or Theoretical deliberation? Does it require presuppositions that are derived by means outside the definition of death itself?
And furthermore, if we still hold true the Law of Contradiction, then we cannot also change the definition of death, and that it is the absence of life and all the aspects we described life such as thought, memories, emotions, sensation, awareness, without breaking another law called The Law of Identity. The Law of Identity states that a thing is identical to itself and is defined as a term and not a proposition. And The Law of Identity would conclude that death is the opposite of life and cannot contain any property that is used to define life itself.
Therefore, based upon the logical parameters presented so far, according to the Law of Contradiction and the Law of Identity, there can be no afterlife. No continuation of any aspect of life, as defined, which would contradict the Law of Identity or The Law of Contradiction. We therefore, upon death, cannot expect to have thinking and deliberation, the memory of who we were or the experiences during our lives, any emotions such as love, anger, happiness or sadness, any sensation of sights, sounds, tastes, smells or touch, and any awareness of our surroundings or the conditions we would be in, pleasurable or painful. A dreamless sleep as Socrates contemplated while awaiting his execution. An afterlife identical to the beforelife, at the same place we were during the Civil War or when the Pyramids were built.
Any attempts to redefine either the meaning of life or death using presuppositions, such as "eternal life" or "immortality", are illogical and contradict both the Law of Contradiction and The Law of Identity. And if a proposition is derived through the use of illogical presuppositions, then it's conclusions can also be considered illogical and therefore irrational given the deliberate use of the illogical premise. Consider Aristotle on this who established the Laws of Logic we are using in our deliberations: "All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal." If all A are B, and all C are A, then all C are B. For us to arrive at a truthful conclusion then the premises must be true. Further appeals to faith do not override a deliberate misuse of logic and if it persists then it must be concluded that the proposition is irrational and therefore false. A false pretense predicated on the assumption of illogical conclusions derived through illogical means.
But the philosopher who did not contradict himself regarding his proposition of death is Epicurus who said: "When we are death is not and when death comes we are not" and he used proper discernment based on the Law of Contradiction and the Law of Identity. And when Paul approached the Epicureans, followers and students of Epicurus, and the Stoics, followers and students of Zeno, in Acts 17:18 of the New Testament at the Agora in Athens, the philosophers called him a babbler, using the same false pretenses explained previously, and sent him on his way. For he spoke of dead people coming to life again and even then, without evidence, that requires the suspension of our reason and disregarding known observations of death to accept, prompting the Epicureans and Stoics rejection of Paul's claims of resurrection as well as the "strange god" he presented. But of course, philosophers have more strict epistemic discernment!
And upon further examination of such claims within scripture, there are inconsistencies in those claims which provide further evidence of their erroneous nature. I am referring to Matt. 27:52–53 which states "The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many." Here we see a claim of resurrection involving "many bodies" which then rose and "appeared to many". Given the significance of even the single resurrection of Jesus which essentially the entire religion is based, we find it impossible for the claim of many resurrections of the saints, who appeared to many, to be omitted or ignored in the other three gospels which are also claimed to be testimonies to the same events that would have been occurring during the reported rising of the saints. Many bodies rising is more significant than one and we feel such a claim should not have gone unnoticed by the other three gospels of Mark, Luke and John. And furthermore provides reasonable doubt and grounds for skepticism of such general claims of resurrection having taken place at all.
So, in conclusion, the State believes it has strong evidence to have reasonable doubt and skepticism, and therefore dismissal, of claims of an afterlife experience according to the Laws of Logic and lack of Empirical evidence. We feel the evidence of such experiences fail to meet either the logical or empirical requirements to consider such evidence as valid, nor meets the demands necessary to establish such evidence as fact. In addition, we feel there is sufficient medical evidence available which provides reasonable doubt to the claim, and the acceptance of claims of NDE or the Afterlife, including contact with deceased relatives or deities, therefore must be considered subjective testimony and biased considering any attempted presuppositions by the defense regarding an established belief (i.e religious) in such claims, and the claims of subsequent believers, who may be operating under the limitations of cognitive bias compelled by, but not limited to, the internalized fear of death and/or the hope of the continuation of themselves beyond the extinction of the body, the brain and the consciousness to allow the capacity to reunite with beloved family members and their own respective deities.
That indeed these psychological compulsions are producing the emotional barriers that contribute to the cognitive bias and their inability to employ logic for the purposes of critical thinking and discernment. Therefore, these testimonies of NDE's are accepted as the necessary evidence to confirm their preexisting beliefs and demonstrate the cognitive bias in effect, and when confronted with opposing facts and logical refutations to these NDE testimonies the resulting cognitive dissonance produces the adverse effects inherent in it's condition, such as discomfort, anger, stress, worry, and general feelings of negativity. In addition, as a result of their preexisting beliefs resulting in cognitive bias it may be preventing the objective assessment of the evidence limiting them to their own subjectivity regarding the validity of this, or any other NDE testimony, as well as contributing to the alleged NDE claimed by the defendant themselves through their own subconscious desires and expectations of the existence of an afterlife during their experience.
The State Rests, Your Honor
Brain chemical "explanations" dont even begin to explain the Near Death Experience (NDE) Data , which materialist atheist fundamentalist always ignore the way this video above did , atheists still need some explanation for why people born blind from birth can suddenly see for first time in their NDE and in their life reviews when their whole life visually passes in front of them for first time and they can later describe visual things and colors to their relatives and they can confirm that was what was actually happening around them , despite fact the blind NDEr never even understood the concept of sight colors etc. (see book MINDSIGHT : Near death experiences in the blind by Ken Ring 1999) same goes for those born deaf from birth , also many people die at same time such as in train plane , car accidents and the dead see each other walking around plane crash sites before going to their afterlife destination and a resuscitated NDEr can tell you who died who didnt and what they told them about their life on plane crash site before departing to otherworld .
Deterministic arational brain chemicals on their way to inevitable conclusions and irresistble world views (like naturalistic atheism) can certainly explain a persons inevitable atheistic brain chemistry, and why they atheists try to explain away NDEs rather than actually explaining uncomfortable data the atheist is biased against , but they aren't very likely to explain the actual NDE data which atheist fundies always ignore the way this video did. by the way I died of a Heart attack in a hospital back in 2019 for 4 and half minutes but Im just one of about 15 million Americans running around with same story
. so atheists really need to begin one day to at least struggle with the actual NDE data , I say good luck with that.
Don't you need brain activity to hallucinate or dream? that's exactly what clinically death people with near death experiencers lack
The fact that these NDE experiences that people have when in a hospital that can tell you conversations of nurses who were in areas of the hospital not near the operating room should give you some pause. How are they able to do that?
I think your brain is overloaded with DMT's at the brink giving the body a major high before death occurs.
You don't make good arguments when your entire video is filled with words like "might, probably, likely." You have no clue and I have no clue. But when you look out into space, we all ask "is there something else? Something beyond?"
I had a near death experience and its similar to a dream, but the problem with dreaming is that they are vivid and random while a near death experience is very clear and somewhat consistent. What i think happens is all related to the mind and there is nothing physical about it. So therefore the mind and body are two separate entities
these people are frightened by near death experiences, that's why they try to explain it away
What does the Bible say? Read Romans.
Evolution took millions of years to provide us with conscientiousness. I would like to think that it also produced a neat way of dealing with potential death situations in an effective/streamlined /standard manner in order to try and avoid death viz. shutting down non-vitals.
Many are not NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCES this is a mis nomer ,,,,these people have no heart beat and no brain waves….they are not nearly dead THEY ARE DEAD…..if they stayed that way they would be laid to rest.
You brain releases DMT when you die. If you have ever tried DMT, you know exactly what these people are experiencing.
I had an experience when I was very ill & hospitalized that has several nde components. I’m pretty sure it was a psychological response much like a dream, to process the situation. I’m also prone to dissociation when stressed.
The vast majority of healers & mediums are clueless and this results in them telling spirits to go in to the light
failing to understand its a trap alot of healers & mediums are connecting with dark entity that are masquerading themselves as someone love ones tricking them
becuase they can easy acess any information about anyone
I disagree. How do u explain knowledge gained that the person couldn't have known like things happening in the next room/ other side of the world/ future?
This guys a Muppet
Many moons ago, I was @ 13, mother took me to a university lecture on near death experiences. The lecturer explained people saw what they expected to see, but couldn't explain why people of different cultures and religions had the same experiences.
I got a bad trip once, and when i closed my eyes, i got sucked into a black hole and heard a voice say that "now you're going to get reincarnated". Probably just a trick of my mind though since i believe in some kind of reincarnation. And it's probably the same with people who are religious and see the light when they're about to die. It all has to do with what you believe in. If you believe in jesus your brain will make you see jesus.
I'm surprised the natural DMT wasn't brought up. Maybe because there is not enough evidence that it can play a role? I always thought that the brain (or body) can release natural hallucinogens such as DMT in near death experiences, but perhaps I was wrong. Maybe someone can enlighten me.
Distracting how you have bleached your teeth into unnatural white!
Or maybe its just the simplest explination. Its real, theres a designer, and a soul.
near death experience not tied to brain activity.
Was anybody else struck by lightning and had to go back in their body
NDE explained by materialist 😂🎉 bullshits. NDE is not hallucinations. Studies of nde was published in Lancet.
Yeah I'm sure this 5 minute video narrated by a definite high functioning autistic man is full of more knowledge than the ones by neuroscientists and neuropsychologists I've watched