Summary judgment: Fenwick excerpt #19

Chief Judge: The most difficult and responsible moment for this inquiry has come.

We need to focus on the fact that we are here to demonstrate that there is an afterlife, and therefore focus on the meaning of the words after and life, and above all on maintaining individuality after the body has ceased to have its own physical functions. I remind you that we are looking for evidence and must keep in mind that the concept of evidence has different meanings in different contexts. We listened to the evidence of experts who presented arguments only at first sight conflicting.

What convinced me of the words of Dr Fenwick is that phenomena such as remote viewing and precognition have now been proven to be verifiable and repeatable even when they are approached with scientific method and rigor. Unfortunately, we do not yet know how to explain them with a model that is unanimously recognized or based on currently known laws of physics. Moreover, precognition and remote viewing do not prove that there is an existence after death.

On the other hand, the descriptions of near-death experiences and reincarnation are interesting. These tell us without a doubt that some individuals have experienced a reality different from the one we know, and that others seem to have inherited an identity lived by individuals other than themselves. These experiences are told by people from different ages, cultures, and education.

Although I am convinced that what was reported can constitute evidence for life beyond death beyond reasonable doubt, Dr Moretti has pointed out to us that, when we describe the experiences of facing death (NDE, ADE, or reincarnation), they are based on human stories. We humans are limited in describing what could exist in another reality. However, Dr Moretti has proposed a model that can offer an explanation.

The proposed model suggests three main aspects to reflect on:

a) the concept of individuality as a localization in space and time,

b) access to a dimension without space and time through the removal of sensory interaction,

c) the condition of humans as a filter for that dimension.

Our individuality is associated with a form of energy that represents the design of one's existence, or rather the functions that the body and mind can express. This energy realizes an existence which, in the interaction with the material world, is localized in space and time. When body and mind reduce their interaction with the outside world, the probability of accessing a dimension without time and space increases, and therefore so does access to information of the past, of the future, and of the whole universe. Dying therefore means accessing information embedded in a reality present everywhere and anytime.

When you access this reality without space and time, you acquire that information, but when you return to the material reality, this information is filtered by the human capacity to understand it.

What we heard made me reflect on two things:

Remote viewing and precognition have many aspects in common with NDE and reincarnation. These aspects can be nicely framed in the proposed model. That is, if we insert the stories and experiments in the model that provides access to a dimension without time and space, the different aspects can be explained through presently accepted scientific laws. The important thing is to accept the assumption that the human condition, when interacting with matter located in time and space, acts as a filter to, let us say, a wider reality.

The approaches we heard from the two experts, one based on physical laws and the other based on witness statements, are indeed compatible. The first implies that after death an individual loses identity and localization, joining a whole that exists anytime and everywhere. Identity has meaning only when localized and therefore filtered by a material condition. Reincarnation can be explained as a partial projection of the global dimension, or the life of a deceased, through the filter of the living individual that can interact in the present. The difference between reincarnation and NDE is the different coherence levels between the global information and the space-time localization of the filter.

Having said that, as a judge of this court, I declare that:

1) When we adopt a scientific method based on the measurement and verification of events, the evidence based on the stories is not sufficient to prove that an individual's consciousness continues beyond death. But it does suggest it.

2) Phenomena such as remote viewing and precognition have been shown to have a scientifically accepted validity, even if difficult to frame them into models unanimously recognized as valid.

3) The proposed model based on the concept of identity localized in space and time, and on access to a dimension without space and time, provides an excellent scientific context to reconcile interpretations from different communities and cultures.

Therefore, while not scientifically proven, I declare that we have evidence that supports the existence of an afterlife beyond reasonable doubt.

But the discussion is unfinished, and I call for action in the future.

We need to focus on aspects of the model in order to design experiments that can guide us to a deeper understanding of the links between the material and immaterial world. We need to put our efforts into reconciling the prejudices from the different scientific communities and open our minds to new discoveries.

Ideas and paradigms can be both useful and a hindrance, that is why it is very important to remember and reflect on their assumptions and suppositions. Reality in today’s physics cannot be contained in space-time and matter only. Old dualities integrate more and more to a complementary, synthetic, organic view. Emphasis is now on the interrelations of part and whole rather than parts only. More importantly a new kind of science emerges where the study of nature ought to be complemented by the very nature of our study, bringing self-reflectivity and consciousness back to its fundamental role in nature.

Adding a non-local dimension to the local one in consciousness studies will prove essential for eventually establishing a Science of Consciousness that will consider reference to wholeness as its most fundamental activity. This non-local dimension will have the same significance for the proposed new science as understanding quantum nonlocal reality had for physics today.

Dear friends, what I have learned in this trial is that maybe I am you, and you are me. We probably were the same thing in the past and probably we will be in the future. And that we see ourselves as different only because we are located now and in this place. Last but not least, I thank you all.

 

“To Be And Not To Be. This is The Answer: Consciousness Survives,” essay for the 2021 Bigelow essay contest submitted by Dr Peter Fenwick & Dr Pier-Francesco Moretti, Dr Vasileios Basios, and Martin Redfern. The complete essay with footnotes is available at https://bigelowinstitute.org/contest_winners3.php.