"First, from a theoretical perspective, nothing in physics and chemistry predicts that protons, electrons, atoms, or molecules will produce something like consciousness. Therefore, trying to explain consciousness in physicochemical terms amounts to backward reasoning from the start. In fact, William James, the founder of American psychology, argued more than 100 years ago that it is principally impossible to prove that brain chemistry produces consciousness—all we can observe are 'concomitant variations' of brain states and states of consciousness. Accordingly, many modern neuroscientists speak of 'neuronal correlates' to states of consciousness in order to avoid fostering the unwarranted notion that consciousness is produced by neuronal activity. Indeed, there is not even a strict parallelism between brain states and states of consciousness.
"Second, from a practical perspective, many scientists have already investigated phenomena at the frontiers of knowledge that question the physicochemical “production hypothesis” of consciousness. These phenomena have chiefly been studied in research disciplines known as psychical research or parapsychology. The phenomena themselves are usually referred to as telepathy (conveying knowledge or feelings from one individual to another without using the usual sensory channels), clairvoyance (perceiving information or events without using the usual sensory channels), precognition and retrocognition (perceiving future or past events), and psychokinesis (psychically affecting matter). These psi phenomena occur comparably rarely, but they do occur and they are perfectly natural. Millions of people have experienced them in everyday life.
"Likewise, phenomena suggestive of survival have been reported since time immemorial. Hence, these experiences can be studied using standard methods of science. More than that: Given that survival is one of the most fundamental questions facing mankind, it is the duty of scientists to study survival-related phenomena, and to do so with an impartial spirit. Among those who have often insisted that studying such psi phenomena including survival should constitute the most important function of science was the renowned biologist, philosopher and parapsychologist Hans Driesch (1867–1941). He furthermore advocated for:
the joy in tracing specifically those prospects the facticity of which has hardly yet been explored, perhaps only foreboded. Only new discoveries take us further, and the ‘newer’ they are, the more do they take us further. Hence my interest in parapsychology.
"In many of his writings, Driesch emphasized that, in natural science, empirical data and arguments are of foremost significance. He stressed that when we discover evidence for phenomena that don’t fit into the currently prevailing world model, we must stay open to revising this model rather than disregarding inconvenient data. Driesch proposed three guiding principles for the study of psi phenomena that are as topical today as they were almost 100 years ago:
- Do not regard any fact “impossible” in an aprioristic way.
- Do not believe that new facts must necessarily be explained by means of explanations already established.
- Try to construct bridges to established scientific disciplines.
"However, it seems that only a few scientists shared such a rationale. One of them was psychiatrist Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, who considered the study of spontaneous psychical phenomena occurring in everyday life exceptionally important. He counted survival phenomena among these. In a Presidential Address at a convention of the Parapsychological Association in 1968, Stevenson presented three arguments for his desire to develop improved methods for the study of spontaneous cases in parapsychology in addition to performing quantitative laboratory experiments:
- Spontaneous cases provide some of the best evidence we have for psi phenomena.
- They often provide much richer information than the outcomes of laboratory experiments.
- They pertain to everyday life and have a profound influence on the beliefs and actions of the people who come into contact with them.
"Stevenson was convinced that the withdrawal of many parapsychologists from the study of spontaneous cases had resulted in a loss of public support and interest in parapsychology. Although he admitted that studying such cases could have methodological weaknesses, he insisted that the appropriate answer would involve improving investigation methods rather than abandoning their study.
"I fully agree with Stevenson’s appraisal, while adding that the possibilities for studying and documenting spontaneous cases, including survival phenomena, have improved considerably since 1968. Of course, they will continue to improve. Therefore, the aims of the present BICS contest to identify the best available evidence for human survival, to raise awareness among the public and within the scientific community, and to encourage future research, are of supreme topicality.
"In my contribution, I argue that there is substantial evidence that establishes the survival of human consciousness. By 'survival of human consciousness' or 'human survival, I mean a broad notion covering 'any aspect of a personality that displays a seemingly self-aware identification and verifiable knowledge continuity with a deceased personality'.
"My essay is structured as follows: In the succeeding Chapter 2, I identify the best available evidence for survival among the different kinds of survival phenomena. I demonstrate that this best evidence is constituted by cases of the reincarnation type (CORT). While doing so, I largely treat the discussed survival phenomena as reported and touch only lightly on their reliability and authenticity, or on how they might best be explained. In order to be truly convincing, the power of explanatory models for a range of given phenomena must be tested by applying them to the most compelling data or evidence. Hence, the best survival evidence among all considered phenomena should first be identified, and only then must the nature of this best evidence be questioned in more depth. Therefore, I only perform an in-depth discussion of different explanatory models for survival phenomena with regard to CORT.
"But before that, Chapter 3 introduces several facets of CORT in more detail. Providing a more comprehensive picture of the phenomenology of CORT is important for determining the most appropriate explanatory model for them. This determination is crucial because it is not enough to merely identify the best available evidence for survival—one must also check whether this evidence is good evidence. As philosopher Michael Sudduth pointed out, the best available evidence for something can still be weak overall and lack persuasive power.
"The in-depth analysis of the strength of the evidence for survival provided by CORT is performed in Chapter 4, relating it to two alternative explanatory models:
1. The physicalist model. This model is based on the assumption that consciousness can be explained by physics and its derivate, chemistry; it is the above-mentioned physicochemical 'production hypothesis' of consciousness. Here, psi phenomena such as telepathy and clairvoyance cannot occur. Likewise, the extra-corporeal existence of consciousness and memory, including survival, cannot occur. All witness testimonies in CORT that favor survival are therefore regarded as flawed in one way or another.
2. The living-agent psi model. This model is based on the assumptions that eyewitness testimonies about survival phenomena are largely authentic and that psi phenomena such as telepathy and clairvoyance can occur. However, it is argued that survival phenomena are not generated by the deceased, but by those still alive. Driven by specific individual motives, living people activate hidden psi faculties and psychically obtain the information required to simulate survival phenomena including CORT. Thereby, usually without even consciously knowing it, they fulfill their own hopes and needs—for example, by creating an apparition or, in CORT, a 'reincarnated' loved one. This model might sound unreasonable for those not familiar with parapsychology, but many parapsychologists acquainted with the huge variety of psi phenomena take it very seriously and it is prominently discussed in the literature concerning the survival question.
In Chapter 5, I put the outcome of the discussions about CORT back into the larger perspective of other survival phenomena and human life, and frame it in the context of 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' as requested in this contest.
In Chapter 6, I provide an outlook concerning future perspectives.
Michael Nahm is a German biologist and parapsychologist whose psi research has focused on terminal lucidity, near-death experiences, cases of the reincarnation type, physical mediumship, hauntings, the history of parapsychology, and various other riddles of the mind and the evolution of life. In 2018 he accepted an appointment at the Institut für Grenzgebiete der Psychologie und Psychohygiene (IGPP) (Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology and Mental Health) in Freiburg, Germany. His publications are available at http://www.michaelnahm.com/publications-and-downloads and his Bigelow essay may be downloaded at https://bigelowinstitute.org/contest_winners3.php. Footnotes have been deleted in these excerpts but are available in his text posted on the Bigelow website.
No comments:
Post a Comment