Book review: Science and the Near-Death Experience

I received my copy of Chris Carter's new book a few weeks ago, but personal events intervened before I could finish reading it, let alone give it a proper review. I've now read all of it, and I'm deeply impressed. Science and the Near-Death Experience is a major addition to the literature of near-death studies, one of the most comprehensive, exhaustively researched, and intellectually serious books ever to cover this fascinating field.

Even better, it's now available in a Kindle edition!

The book makes no secret of its conclusion; the subtitle is How Consciousness Survives Death. Carter lays out his case methodically and logically, like an attorney delivering a masterful closing argument. The opposing side's views are given their due, but the intention throughout is to show that there is a preponderance of evidence in favor of the survivalist interpretation.

Despite the density of its subject matter, Science and the Near-Death Experience is crisply readable. Carter manages the admirable feat of summarizing complicated scientific and philosophical controversies in just a few paragraphs. Take a look at his analysis of eliminitive materialism:

This may sound bizarre, but since materialism cannot account for consciousness, some materialists simply deny their own existence as conscious beings. They are driven to this act of desperation by their conviction that science, which they understand as applied materialism, supports them. Note the self-refuting nature of this position: If I believe that consciousness does not exist, then how could my belief exist? If my consciousness does not exist, then neither does my belief. And if my professed belief is nothing more than a machine going through its motions, then you have no reason to accept it as correct. [p. 71]

This argument isn't original with Carter, but I've seldom seen it expressed so neatly.

Carter's erudition is phenomenal; he seems to have read nearly everything about NDEs and a great deal about related subjects, ranging from ketamine injections to native American folklore. He covers nearly every major proposed psychological and physiological explanation for NDEs, deftly exposing their shortcomings. He treats us to a review of the history of science from ancient Greece to the present day; a crash course in quantum mechanics and its major interpretations (though omitting David Bohm's "holographic universe"); an overview of nascent hypotheses of quantum consciousness; and a look at theories of life and memory. He also throws in a section on deathbed visions. In some ways Science and the Near-Death Experience reminded me of Irreducible Mind in its scope and seriousness, though Carter's prose is more reader-friendly than the dry academic style of IM. (By the way, for those who were put off by the sky-high price of IM in hardcover, there's now a more affordable paperback edition.)

I do have a few criticisms of Carter's book. For one thing, I felt that it began too abruptly, plunging the reader into a heavy discussion of philosophy and science after only the briefest of introductions. It might have been preferable to move Chapter 7, "Reports from the Brink," to the beginning of the book, so as to present some typical NDEs and set the stage for the in-depth discussion that would follow.

I also found it odd that some of the more prominent critics of nonphysical interpretations of NDEs went unnamed. Two examples are Keith Augustine and Gerald Woerlee. Neither is mentioned in the book or included in the bibliography. In particular, I would have liked to see a detailed response to Woerlee's theory that NDEs are explainable in terms of partial consciousness during CPR or while under anesthesia.

Finally, I found Chapter 3, "Opinions from Neuroscience," rather sketchy. Only two neuroscientists - Wilder Penfield and John Eccles - are cited, and while they're both prominent figures, their work was carried out decades ago. Later in the book, however, we do learn of some contemporary neurologists who are critical of materialist explanations, and the section on quantum consciousness suggests an alternative to more conventional theories.

These are relatively minor criticisms, which I mention mainly for completeness. Overall, Science and the Near-Death Experience is a remarkable accomplishment, deserving the widest possible audience. I can't say it any better than Ervin Laszlo, who writes:

Carter's book is not only an important contribution to this literature; it is its current crowning achievement. For he masters both the theoretical and the evidential approach, showing that belief to the contrary of the survival of consciousness is mere, and now entirely obsolete, dogma, and that the evidence for survival is clear and rationally convincing. A book to read and to remember for the rest of one's life - and perhaps beyond ...

--------- 

P.S. I intend to post a very abbreviated version of this review on Amazon, and I suggest that readers who enjoyed Science and the Near-Death Experience post their own reviews there, as well. Reader reviews can be highly effective in selling books. 

Comments

[Zerdini]

And that's the real challenge with spiritualism. It's not skeptics or debunkers but the spiritualists themselves who do not place pursuit of truth above material fame and pursuit of riches.

I'd probably agree that most spiritualists are frauds.

How weird! I hope you are not confusing Spiritualists with mediums – the two words are not synonymous.

[Mike M]

J9:"So, maybe I'm naive, but when he says "knowledge that I have currently", wouldn't that include what he knows of the results from AWARE. He is running, he must know what some of the results are"

I dont think Parnia knows what the results are yet otherwise he wouldn't be beating around the bush. He could just come out and say nobody has had an NDE/OBE, nobody has seen anything, etc.

Remember, Parnia stated he interviewed hundreds of patients who had NDE/OBES that accurately described what was happening in their surroundings, he later verified this with the physicians.

He also mentioned not knowing the number of people that had OBEs. So far, their are 750 cardiac arrest patients. In 12 to 18 months, he will be out with the preliminary results (how many had NDEs/OBEs, etc. etc.)

[Paul]

Looks like I won't be needing to spit my teeth into that trolley anytime soon.

[sbu]

The AWARE study will be the final word on NDEs from the scientific community for a long time if the study comes out negative. A main difference in this experiment from most other NDE experiment is the fact the patients are interviewed almost immediately after their resurrection. This is a quite different approach from interviewing people many years after their incident (like that dutch case from 79) which gives them plenty time to decorate whatever experience they had with a supernatural flavor.

I just don't see why anyone seriously would consider continuing to fund NDE research if the AWARE study comes out negative. I know Sam Parnia had to search hard for many years to obtain funding for the AWARE study (and he sounded much more open for the possible that consciouness actually leaves the body in those early interviewes). I can't help thinking the same as j9 - that his change in rhetoric indicates a negative outcome.

[sbu]

Actually Parnia says nothing new in the interview - and with the timelime he is giving, 12-18 months before they even have 750 cardia arrest survivors, it suggests to me that the real problem is that they almost haven't begun. Probably due to a minimal budget. I'm quite sure they talked about a project involving thousands of patients when they started.

With 750 cases they aren't likely to have more than 10 or so OBE's according to the Van Lommel study....

[Mark]

A main difference in this experiment from most other NDE experiment is the fact the patients are interviewed almost immediately after their resurrection.

I think you're wrong sbu. When did this study start - 2008, 2009? Now it's 2010. In the Vimeo lecture Parnia did for the UK Skeptics a few months ago (IIRC in the Q&A) he said he was just starting to interview the patients. At least that's what I remember.

If he's just started the interviews a few months ago he might not have done very many of them yet. So he might not have looked at most of the data. If he hasn't then he wouldn't know either way whether there were any hits.

I'd guess he's acting neutral because he's hedging his bets. He can't come out too strongly for NDEs or people might say he biased the results if they are good. Also his reputation would suffer major embarrassment if he came out strongly and the results he expected didn't come through. So neutrality is the only PC option for him until the study is over.

[Michael Prescott]

"which gives them plenty time to decorate whatever experience they had with a supernatural flavor"

Is there any evidence of such embellishment? As I recall, a study was done in which NDErs were interviewed twice - once fairly soon after the event, and then again roughly ten years later. No significant changes in their stories were found.

Some NDErs have started talking about their experience almost immediately upon waking up. It's because they told doctors and nurses about it that they came to the attention of NDE researchers.

"The AWARE study will be the final word on NDEs from the scientific community for a long time if the study comes out negative."

Possibly, but if so, there are other avenues of investigation available. The scientific community isn't the only arbiter of truth.

[Zerdini]

Possibly, but if so, there are other avenues of investigation available. The scientific community isn't the only arbiter of truth.

Quite so.

[sbu]

Is there any evidence of such embellishment? As I recall, a study was done in which NDErs were interviewed twice - once fairly soon after the event, and then again roughly ten years later. No significant changes in their stories were found.

This is the Van Lommel et al. study from 2001.

I don't question the validity of NDE experiences - I just think due to the current paranormal hype it's likely that not all testimonies are true. According to scientific studies only about 5% of cardiac arrest survivers have an OBE experience - making such a thing rare.

[Roger Knights]

OT but interesting:

I've read somewhere a wish that dice had colored surfaces, because guessing or influencing colors via psi accords better with an intuitive state of mind than doing so for numbers.

I've just discovered a source for a large (3/4 inch) pair of dice with colored spots for $3 on Amazon, here:

http://www.amazon.com/Large-Multi-Colored-Opaque-Dice/dp/B000URJ1SU/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=IVV6CJ3Q37F4V&colid=32XB1IXGTNRV6

[kris]

oh joy making dogmatic claims which have been debunked for 20 years.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39571906

[Cyrus]

From the above link:

"The tunnel phenomenon "is caused by the eye's susceptibility to the low blood flow that occurs with fainting or cardiac arrest," he said. "As blood flow diminishes, vision fails peripherally first. There is no reason to believe that other animals are any different from us." "

It's pretty disturbing that stuff like this gets reported without counter-responses. It's just one-sided journalism.

I know of one personal account of this type of 'tunnel' which a lady gave right before she died. She said everything was closing in around her, her vision was getting darker and darker and collapsing to a single point, then she died.

This has no relation to the tunnel described as literally a wormhole into another dimension.

[Art]

"I don't question the validity of NDE experiences - I just think due to the current paranormal hype it's likely that not all testimonies are true." - Sbu
-----------------------

They don't have to all be true. It only takes one white crow to prove that not all crows are black. It only takes one "real" NDE to prove that this so called "physical" life is not all there is. To be honest I find death bed visions to be even more convincing than near death experiences. Some of the death bed visions that I've read ring eerily "true." The connection between near death experiences, death bed visions, quantum physics, and the holographic universe theory all point me in the direction that we are simply spiritual beings having a physical experience. It's as simple as that.

[sbu]

The connection between near death experiences, death bed visions, quantum physics..

What is the link from particle physics to consciousness? Particle physics is to my knowledge a classification of sub atomic particles with regards to mass, weak and strong interaction, electromagnetism, spin + a bunch of probablity distributions for observing the particles in a given state. There are actually no connection to consciousness at all!

[Kris]

I will let Art field this but from what I understand there are arguments that the mind is a Quantum Product.

[Michael Prescott]

I'm sure Art is referring to David Bohm's holographic universe interpretation of QM. Art sees significant parallels between the implications of a holographic universe and the reports of some NDErs - for instance, that everything is interconnected, the whole is contained in every part, and the space-time universe is a sort of image projected out of a deeper reality.

Many interpretations of QM do make a direct link to consciousness. The Von Neumann-Wigner interpretation is one example. It's difficult to make sense of experiments like the delayed choice quantum eraser without bringing consciousness into the mix.

[GregL]

I myself find the theoretical quantum connection of the brain and mind, as presented in both the Carter and van Lommel books, to be a weak argument at best. We are basically presented with the theory of a minute connection occuring in the synaptic gap, cabable of an infinitesimally small manipulation of only the probability of a given neuron action. This seems to be the equivilant of playing a piano with only an intermittent key connection and trying to produce Mozart.

This is why I lean to the VR theory of survival. It gets us outside of this conundrum. There is no brain mind connection, because there is no brain to connect to. Only illusion.

[Bruce Siegel]

"To be honest I find death bed visions to be even more convincing than near death experiences."

There's an article today on CNN.com (via Oprah.com) today called "Do the dead greet the dying?"

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/10/18/o.end.of.life/index.html?hpt=C2

Nice to see this stuff getting mainstream exposure.

[Aftrbrnr]

The comments section of the article is a train wreck, coming from both sides of "believers" and skeptics. I think there is a lack of knowledge with regards to both sides, one of the comments states these visions (and NDEs) would be more believable if they imparted knowledge we didn't know before hand (i.e. verdicial information). Just from reading that, I know the person only has a shallow knowledge of spirituality and life after death phenomenon because as most of us here know, there are a lot of cases where unknown knowledge has been imparted to the living.

This is also a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but I continue to see materialist skeptics say so many people cling onto life after death because it makes them feel more comfortable instead of facing the truth. What I notice a lot of them ignore are people who do believe we only have one life but are deeply depressed because they feel they are nothing more than a machine or life is worthless now, etc. Basically, the skeptics don't seem to mention those going through existential angst, sure they've met their criteria of "accepting the truth" but whether or not they're happy about it seems to be of no relevance to them.

[TomC]

From the same CNN article:

--------------------------------------
.....I replied quickly, showing my knowledge back to her: "You're speaking of deathbed visions, most likely caused by a lack of oxygen to the brain or a side effect of morphine."

She looked at me and sighed, "It will come with maturity."
----------------------------------------

I really like Elisabeth Kübler Ross' response. Ultimately, many of us have to gain that maturity to accept the dying people's visions and how they choose to interpret them. It really made my heart sank reading all that comments from those 'scientific' minds.

what great knowledge or great wisdom can those people bestow onto those who are dying by refuting their beliefs in what they saw? if those skeptics are right, then why still make such an asshole effort to show that they're wrong and are delusional?

This article was neutral- the author made no attempt of claiming this as scientific discovery- he offered anecdotal experiences and nothing more. yet those people just blasted this article as 'pseudoscience'! or bullied the author or other commentators for being a dupe.

this sense of self-serving righteousness makes me feel so disgusted about our humanity and our increasingly lack of compassion toward other human beings.

in the end, they're really speaking more about their own fears and denial about their true nature than about the 'ignorance' that they profess to dispel.

life is about your own experience, in your own point of view, and you are spending every moment of your life trying to reach out and to relate to other people so you can share your life experience with others- not to force your view on another.

it's ironic that they're reaching out to make others experience life like they do, while further denying that this shared experience is nothing more than hallucinations.

[Michael Prescott]

"this sense of self-serving righteousness makes me feel so disgusted about our humanity and our increasingly lack of compassion toward other human beings"

Well, try not to despair. Hardcore skeptics probably account for no more than 5% of the population - quite possibly only 2%. They are disproportionately represented online for the same reason that Objectivists (Ayn Rand fans) are. People who are very left-brain oriented, dogmatic, and unsocial or antisocial tend to gravitate toward the Internet and spend a lot of time haranguing strangers on message boards. Regular people who have busy, happy lives don't do that.

If I can judge by popular culture, I'd say most folks are open to the idea that NDEs are real phenomena indicative of an afterlife. They may not have time to study the subject in depth or to debate with skeptics, but they're out there. And they're showing their "compassion for other human beings" by working in hospitals, daycare centers, schools, etc., while the naysayers sit in front of their keyboards and bang out angry screeds.

Please note: I don't mean to characterize all skeptics like this, only the ones who are rudely dismissive of any contrary point of view.

[Aftrbrnr]

I agree with Micheal here, it's not a bash towards the materialist skeptics but I too find it odd that despite being statistically very small in numbers, their presence on the Internet seems so large.

A friend and I actually discussed how when it comes to topics like NDEs, really all you have are a few proponents on one side, a few skeptics on the other, and the bulk of the rest of the population who really doesn't care too much about the topic.

[Cyrus]

I think regular folk do care about the topic. Jeff Long's NDE book was a best-seller. A LOT of people off-hand accept the possibility of an afterlife, and will often cite things like NDEs as evidence to reinforce their belief.

But they don't have time to commit to it. As Michael said, many people are the nurses, social workers, etc. who are 'walking the walk' instead of debating online.

[Art]

I'm not sure it's important to get either an affirmative or positive response. It may be enough just to expose people to the information and then if they ever need it the information will be there stored in their brains for future use? Just being exposed to NDE's and death bed visions and whatnot may be enough so that when their time comes their transition will be a little bit easier. The truth is that none of knows with 100% confidence what we will experience when our time comes. We have theories and ideas and hopes but when it is actually our time to cross over each one us will individually find out the truth. Everything else exists in the realm of speculation - no matter how much we proclaim our truth is the absolute truth.

[Ronnie Lee]

Hey Art, you may like this ;)

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2010/10/20/fermilab-scientists-to-test-hypothesis-of-holographic-universe/

[Michael Prescott]

Interesting article, Ronnie Lee. I may not have understood it correctly, but quotes like this make me think the experiment could apply equally well to the Virtual Reality theory:

"To Hogan, the jitteriness suggested that the experiment had stumbled upon the lower limit of the spacetime pixels’ resolution."

And:

"... although a holographic universe would answer many questions about black hole physics and other paradoxes, it clashes with classical geometry, which demands a universe of smooth, continuous paths in space and time."

The idea that space and time are discontinuous is consistent with VR theory as well.

One oddity is that the article makes no mention of David Bohm, originator of the holographic universe idea.

[Art]

Thank you so much for the link to the article. What fun! I've had a ball posting the link and a short excerpt from the article to all my naysayers and pooh-poohers of my theories. I'm one step closer to being proven correct. The things that near death experiencers say all point me in the direction that our so called physical universe really is some kind of strange holographic projection.
--------

There is a connection between NDE’s and quantum physics and the holographic universe that has never been adequately explained away to me. Near death experiencers routinely describe their experiences in terms that can only be called “holographic” and they also say things that seem to parallel things I’ve read about quantum physics. I find that very evidential. There is no way that a housewife from Kansas or an uneducated truck driver from South Georgia would know or understand anything about quantum physics or the holographic nature of the universe.

People who have NDE’s routinely talk about overwhelming feelings of oneness and connectedness, feeling like they are everywhere in the universe at once, time and space not existing, buildings that are “made out of knowledge”, 360 degree vision, seeing colors they’ve never seen before, hearing sounds that they haven’t heard in this physical universe, and during the life review seeing their whole lives flash by in an instant (bolus of information)and feeling the emotions and feelings of the people they interacted with (the life review is a holographic experience par excellence), and how the other side will feel even more real to us than this side does, and feeling the feelings and hearing the thoughts of the people they interacted with. I find these things to be very evidential because it parallels things I’ve read about in popular physics books.

There is quite a bit of evidence from physics and near death experiences that our so called physical universe is some kind of strange holographic projection. The implications of this are enormous. The blurriness of a holographic projection explains why it is that so many near death experiencers say that the other side will feel even more real to us than this side does, and how it could be “realer than real” or “more consciousness than normal.” Near death experiencers also say that it will feel even more real to us than this side does. I’m thinking that the place we call “heaven” is actually the original film from where our universe is projected from.

Mark Horton’s NDE
http://www.mindspring.com/~scottr/nde/markh.html

[Art]

and by the way, you can be sure that the link will be copied into my list of favorites with all my other "holographic universe" links.

[GregL]

"The idea that space and time are discontinuous is consistent with VR theory as well."

I believe that the holgraphic theory and the VR theory are mutually supportive. The holographic universe can be seen as a result of the VR projection of reality.

[Art]

I love this quote from Kelly K's near death experience description:

"The next thing I recall was being shown the universe. I remember thinking, "So, THAT'S how it is! I was in awe. It was like a huge net, or chain link fence, everything in the universe is connected."

http://nderf.org/kelly_k's_nde.htm

Reminds me of the holodeck on Star Trek: The Next Generation; the grid pattern. It has a very "holographic" flavor to it. It's also interesting because Victor Solow describes something almost identical in his NDE description.

"The last impression I can recall lasted a brief instant. I was moving at high speed toward a net of great luminosity."

http://tatfoundation.org/forum2003-12.htm

[Art]

I just ordered Chris Carter's new book Science and the Near-Death Experience and Raymond Moody's book Glimpses of Eternity with Paul Perry from Amazon.com. Supposed to recieve them around the end of the month. Sort of a Christmas present to myself! Looking forward to reading both of them.

[Roger Knights]

Wall St. J article, Seeking Proof in Near Death Claims

[Art]

I got the two new books I ordered from Amazon.com in the mail today. I started reading Glimpses of Eternity and it is so positive and uplifting. If you want to feel good and have good feelings about life after death I suggest reading Glimpses of Eternity by Raymond Moody M.D. I've read about twenty pages so far all ready today and it is really interesting and uplifting. I give it two thumbs up!

Oh yeah, I haven't started Chris Carter's book yet but I will read it right after I finish Glimpses of Eternity.