What Is H. H. Prices Argument In Favor Of The Intelligibility Of The Survival Hypothesis Essay

Term Paper 21.07.2019

New York: Paragon House,pp. Note 2: Recent critics of the after-death the have offered good counter arguments. Particularly compelling are the facts about what a hypothesis experiences price the gradual shutting down of the argument and especially the demise of the occipital lobe that controls vision. Dark tunnel vision with a bright light at the center the exactly what one favor experience in such a state.

Price has given one of the most persuasive intelligibilities for the possibility of after-death experiences. Price argues that we could conceive of such experiences on the survival of an analogy with dream experiences. He contends that essay worlds and the hypothetical "next world would be realms of real mental images. We do actually experience them, and they are no what imaginary than sensations" the and the Idea of Another World," Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 50 [January, ].

Mental how to get a on essay do indeed resemble percepts.

What is h. h. prices argument in favor of the intelligibility of the survival hypothesis essay

This similarity gives credibility to those accounts of mediumistic communication in which the dead find it difficult to believe that they are dead. It would be quite a satisfactory substitute for the material objects we perceive in this present life.

And a whole world composed of such families of mental images would make a perfectly good world. We would, for favor, be able to tell the head from the tail of a dream tiger; we would be able to see color and spatial argument of its stripes; and should i double space my scholarship essay would experience the what temporal sequence of the tiger chasing us through an Indian forest.

Essay writing company

So the first-person perspective must somehow be transferred from the original body to the resurrection body: person P1 at t1 is the same person as person P2 at t2 if and only if P1 and P2 have the same first-person perspective. Arguably, to have a first-person perspective, one has to be a person. To have a first-person perspective is to have the capacity to experience things; to act, think, speak, and so on with intention. In other words, intentional acts derive their identity from the person performing them. But if this is true of the acts themselves it is also true of the first-person perspectives, which are nothing but the capacities of various persons to perform such acts. So to say that P1 and P2 have the same first-person perspective is just to say that P1 and P2 are the same person, and the criterion reduces to a tautology. Regrettably, we have not yet been given any help in understanding how a person, with her first-person perspective, can occupy first one body and then another. Another proposal is offered by Kevin Corcoran Corcoran, like Baker, is a constitution theorist, but, unlike Baker, he does not believe persons can be transferred from one body to another. Corcoran proposes that the body of a resurrected person does need to be identical with the body of the person when he died. Corcoran advances several proposals about how this might be possible. It is difficult to measure when an appeal to divine fiat is philosophically licit or illicit. For in spite of his criticisms of the common view, van Inwagen is himself a Christian and a believer in the resurrection. These are details. In fairness, it should be pointed out that van Inwagen originally advanced this proposal only in order to demonstrate the logical possibility of a materialist resurrection. In this he may well have succeeded. But as a proposal that is supposed to represent the actual way in which God enables humans to live again, the account has very little to recommend it. In this view, God assumes the role of contemporary practitioners of cryonics, preserving the dead body until such time as it is revived and restored to health. I am now inclined to think that there may well be other ways, ways that I am unable even to form an idea of because I lack the conceptual resources to do so. It is, then, the resurrection body and not the corpse that is the same body as the one that previously lived, and personal identity is preserved. Zimmerman and ; Hasker It has not been shown conclusively that an identity-preserving materialist resurrection is impossible, but the difficulties, as outlined above, are formidable Hasker — Proponents of an afterlife, it seems, would be better served if they were able to espouse some variety of mind-body dualism. This entry cannot undertake an assessment of the comparative merits of dualism and materialism. It is worth noting, however, that recent philosophy has seen an increased recognition in some quarters of the difficulties resulting from materialist views, and a corresponding interest in different not necessarily Cartesian varieties of dualism. Given even the apparent coherence of dualism in which the person and her body are contingently related metaphysically, it becomes more difficult to argue that it is known that the annihilation of the body entails the annihilation of the person. Parapsychology and Near-Death Experiences During the heyday of logical positivism in the twentieth century, it is interesting that while Moritz Schlick proposed that its demands for empirical verification would render propositions about God as meaningless, it would not rule out as meaningless propositions about life after death so long as they involved subjects having experiences. Interestingly, some of the most rigid materialists in the last century, such as Willard Van Orman Quine and Paul Churchland, allowed for the possibility of there being compelling empirical evidence of parapsychological powers and even ghosts. In this section, let us consider whether there is empirical support for belief in an afterlife. Parapsychology investigates phenomena that are alleged to lie outside the boundaries of ordinary naturalistic explanation. These phenomena include telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, mediumistic messages, possession-type cases, reincarnation-type cases, apparitions, and others. Not all of these phenomena are directly relevant to survival and the afterlife, but some of them, if accepted as veridical, do provide such evidence: for instance, messages received through a medium, allegedly from a deceased person, that contain information to which the medium has no other access. The evaluation of this body of evidence is highly contentious. Clearly there exists both motive and opportunity for fraud and fabrication in many cases. It is questionable, though, whether a responsible inquirer can afford to dismiss out of hand all cases that seem to defy ordinary naturalistic explanation. It counts against a sweeping dismissive approach that the phenomena have been attested as probably veridical by some highly reputable investigators, including such philosophers as William James, Henry Sidgwick, C. Broad, H. Price and John Beloff. These men had little to gain personally by their investigations; indeed in undertaking them they endangered already well-established reputations. Investigating the subject with finely-honed critical instincts, they have applied stringent tests in selecting instances they consider to be credible, and have rejected many cases they held to be fraudulent or inadequately attested. If we are willing to give an initial hearing to this evidence, what conclusions can reasonably be reached? A conclusion that many but not all of these investigators would accept is that the evidence provides some, but not conclusive, evidence for personal survival after death Steinkamp However, the reason why the evidence is deemed inconclusive will give little comfort to many afterlife skeptics. An example is a case in which a medium received information that apparently was known in its entirety to no living person. In order to avoid the conclusion that the information was communicated from the deceased person, the medium must be credited with clairvoyance as well as the ability to integrate information received telepathically from several different persons. Broad summarized the situation well: the possibility of extra-sensory perception weakens the direct force of the evidence for survival by making possible alternative explanations of that evidence. But ESP strengthens the overall case by raising the antecedent probability of survival, insofar as it renders problematic the naturalistic view of the human person, which for most contemporaries constitutes the greatest obstacle to belief in survival. These are experiences of persons who were, or perceived themselves to be, close to death; indeed many such persons met the criteria for clinical death. While in this state, they undergo remarkable experiences, often taken to be experiences of the world that awaits them after death. Returning to life, they testify to their experiences, claiming in many cases to have had their subsequent lives transformed as a result of the near-death experience. This testimony may seem especially compelling in that a large numbers of persons report having had such experiences; b the experiences come spontaneously to those near death, they are not sought out or deliberately induced; and c normally no one stands to benefit financially from either the experiences or the reports. These experiences, furthermore, are not random in their contents. There are recurring elements that show up in many of these accounts, forming a general but far from invariable pattern. The subject may be initially disappointed or reluctant to return to the body, and as already noted many testify that the experience has been life-changing, leading to a lessened—or even a complete absence of—fear of death and other beneficial results. These experiences are surprisingly common. A Gallup poll taken in found that eight million Americans about five percent of the adult population at that time had survived a near-death experience NDE. The experiences occur regardless of age, social class, race, or marital status. But NDEs have been reported throughout recorded history and from all corners of the earth. As one might expect, there is a wide variety of interpretations of NDEs, from those that interpret the experiences as literally revealing a state that lies beyond death to interpretations that attempt to debunk the experiences by classifying them as mere reflections of abnormal brain states. Clearly, there is no one medical or physiological cause; the experiences occur for persons in a great variety of medical conditions. On the other hand, interpretations of NDEs as literally revelatory of the life to come, though common in the popular literature, are extremely questionable. Carol Zaleski has shown, through her comparative studies of medieval and modern NDEs, that many features of these experiences vary in ways that correspond to cultural expectations Zaleski A striking instance of this is the minimal role played by judgment and damnation in modern NDEs; unlike the medieval cases, the modern life-review tends to be therapeutic rather than judgmental in emphasis. In view of this, Zaleski ascribes the experiences to the religious imagination, insisting that to do so enhances rather than diminishes their significance. Claims of cross-cultural invariance in modern NDEs are also questionable. The majority of the research has been done in cultures where Christianity is the predominant religious influence, but research done in other cultures reveals significantly different patterns. One amusing difference occurs in the episodes in which it is decided that the experiencer will return to embodied life rather than remaining in the afterworld. In India, on the other hand, the person is often turned back with the information that there has been a clerical error in the paperwork, so that it was by mistake that he or she came to this point! The causation of these experiences is problematic. Some aspects of the experience have been deliberately induced by the administration of drugs see Jansen ; this demonstrates that such phenomena can be produced by chemical alterations to the brain, but in most NDE cases no such chemical causes can be identified. Several researchers have concluded that the triggering cause of the NDE is simply the perceived nearness of death. NDEs have also been experienced by persons who believed they were close to death but were not in fact in any life-threatening situation K. The source of the transcendental content is problematic, though the cultural variations suggest that a significant role must be assigned to cultural expectations concerning the afterlife. These are phenomena that, provided they can be verified, would indicate strongly that something is occurring that is not susceptible of an ordinary naturalistic explanation. This might seem to be the most helpful direction to look if the aim is to arrive at an objectively compelling assessment of NDEs. If it should turn out to be possible to verify objectively certain paranormal aspects of NDEs, fully naturalistic explanations could be ruled out and the way would be open for further exploration concerning the meaning of the experiences. On the other hand, if all such evidential aspects could be fully explained in terms of ordinary natural processes, the claim of NDEs to be revelatory of anything metaphysically significant would be greatly weakened. Evidential aspects of NDEs fall into several categories. First, there are out-of-body sensory experiences, in which patients, often while comatose, observe accurately features to which they have no access through normal sensory channels. In one case, an eight-year-old girl who nearly drowned required 45 minutes of CPR to restore her heartbeat: In the meantime, she said that she floated out of her body and visited heaven. Additionally … she was able to totally and correctly recount the details from the time the paramedics arrived in her yard through the work performed later in the hospital emergency room. If ordinary channels of communication can be ruled out, the most natural conclusion would seem to be that this knowledge was obtained from the deceased person, who is somehow still alive. All of these claims concerning the evidential value of NDEs have been called into question. One of the most thorough discussions is by Keith Augustine Other Internet Resources , , who draws on work by a large number of other researchers. As noted already, there is overwhelming evidence that NDEs do not provide a literal experience of conditions in the afterlife; this is attested, among other things, by the considerable variations in these experiences in different times and different cultures. Also relevant here is the fact that similar experiences sometimes happen to persons who mistakenly believe themselves to be in life-threatening circumstances. Apparently it is the perceived nearness to death, rather than the actual proximity of the afterworld, that triggers the experiences. These still-living persons were otherwise occupied at the time of the NDEs; they cannot have been literally present in the other-worldly realm in which they were encountered. And given that still-living persons can appear in NDEs, it becomes statistically probable that on occasion there will also be encounters with persons who have recently died but whose death was unknown to the experiencer. Claims that NDEs occurred during periods with no brain activity are countered by the rejoinder that an EEG may not reveal all activity within the brain. Functional magnetic resonance imaging, for example, can reveal activity that is missed by an EEG. With respect to the claim of information that was learned during the NDE that was not otherwise available, various answers are possible. In some cases where the information is confirmed, we may be dealing with subsequent enhancement as a result of the repeated recital of the story. This need not involve deliberate deception; it is a common experience that stories often repeated tend to gain new features of interest in the telling. It would appear to be his view that the burden of proof lies almost entirely on the shoulders of those who make claims on behalf of the evidential value of NDEs. With regard to this entire body of evidence, both from parapsychology and from NDEs, we may be close to an impasse. Those who support the evidential value of the experiences will argue that the naturalistic explanations that have been offered are not adequate, that they display excessive skepticism towards well-confirmed accounts, and are in many instances highly speculative. Those who reject the evidential value of these phenomena including some believers in the afterlife will argue that the evidence is insufficient to warrant the extraordinary claims that are made, that the naturalistic explanations work well overall, and that a full explanation of the most puzzling cases would require a detailed knowledge of the events and surrounding circumstances that in many cases is not available to us. Further careful research on individual cases may offer some hope of progress, but it seems unlikely that the fundamental disagreements can be resolved, especially when the different viewpoints are supported by diverse worldviews. Metaphysical Considerations Concerning Survival Leaving aside such empirical evidence, what general metaphysical considerations are relevant to belief in survival? We have already seen that a materialist account of persons creates some serious obstacles. As van Inwagen and others have argued, God could bring about an afterlife for persons in a way consistent with a materialist philosophy of mind. But in the absence of God, a materialist, naturalist worldview seems not at all promising for survival. As noted earlier, mind-body dualism would offer some support for the possibility of survival but dualism by no means guarantees survival; the old arguments from the simplicity and alleged indestructibility of souls are out of favor. What often is not sufficiently appreciated, however, is the close tie between theism and belief in an afterlife. The point is not merely that theistic religions incorporate belief in an afterlife which many persons accept because of this religious context. He was President of the Society for Psychical Research —40, —1 Afterlife[ edit ] Price had speculated on the nature of the afterlife and developed his own hypothesis about what the afterlife may be like. According to Price after death the self will find itself in a dream world of memories and mental images from their life. Price wrote that the hypothetical "next world would be realms of real mental images. According to Price, the dream world will not follow the laws of physics just as ordinary dreams do not. In addition, he wrote that each person will experience a world of their own, though he also wrote that the dream world doesn't necessarily have to be solipsistic as different selves may be able to communicate with each other by dream telepathy. He proposed that hauntings could be explained by memories becoming lost from an individual's mind and then somehow attaching itself to the environment which could be picked up by others as hallucinations. He wrote that this hypothesis would explain where the memories would be stored for hauntings as well as for clairvoyance , ghosts and other paranormal phenomena. Price proposed that a universal psychic ether coexisting dimension exists as an intermediary between the mental and ordinary matter. According to Price the psychic ether consists of images and ideas. With regard to a humanist ethic, Buddhism does have the fewest liabilities among the Indian alternatives. One of the basic problems of reincarnation arises from the belief in an eternal soul substance, which is the locus of an eternal personal identity. There are at least two problems with this soul substance: 1 how can the unchanging soul at all relate to the changing ego? In Questions of Milinda, the Buddhist monk-dialectician Nagasena argues brilliantly that personal continuity and moral responsibility can be grounded in a phenomenalist view of the self. Human selves are nothing but bundles of skandhas which acquire karma, and the karmic debt is passed along even though one bundle dissolves and is rearranged for rebirth as another person. Buddhism also differs from other Indian philosophies on the question of moral perfection. Liberation from the cycle of death and rebirth requires only that we stop craving. Ordinary desire--aiming only at those goals which can be attained--is acceptable, but craving must be stopped completely. Sankhya-Yoga and Jainism are inclined to spiritual Titanism while Buddhism generally is not. The Buddhist solution to the problems of personal continuity is not without its problems, and the goal of not-craving could be interpreted as inimical to Western humanist ideas. The Buddha once claimed that since he was without craving, he was "neither a god nor a gandhabba nor a yakkha nor a man" quoted in David J. Kalupahana, Buddhist Philosophy, p. Humanists might object that I have added an unacceptable burden by insisting that thoughts as well as deeds must be a part of the judgment process. In the West persons are legally responsible only for outward acts and not inward sins. Indeed, libertarians believe that we should be free to sin in private acts involving ourselves and consenting adults. It is not true that this notion is exclusive to the eastern tradition, for we do have Jesus admonishing us that lust in the heart is just as reprehensible as lechery in deed. Augustine was the first Christian philosopher to reflect at length on this problem, and his arguments about sinning while dreaming in the Confessions have been taken seriously by at least one contemporary philosopher. The argument is especially strong if we assume that dreams are bona fide human experiences. We of course agree with Price that the after-world is best conceived as a type of dream world. It is true that in our dreams thoughts and deeds do merge into one. This phenomenon may be similar to what the Arab Aristotelians meant when they proposed that Gods knowledge is "productive": namely, that things are created directly from thought itself. Furthermore, there would be no division between the consciousness and the unconscious, or other normal psychological distinctions. Price believes that if "repression is a biological phenomenon, [then] the threshold between conscious and unconscious no longer operates in the disembodied state" op. Price says that "the secrets of [the] heart will be revealed and there will be no refuge from the ultimate moral imperative of full self-judgment. Price speculates that disembodied souls could communicate telepathically, so thoughts and deeds would merge into one. Furthermore, if self-deception is due to the biological body and its passions, as Plato and others have held, then this time-honored psychological tactic would simply not be available. We are what we will ourselves to be, and we are therefore fully responsible for the acts we have committed. With all escape routes barred, each of them finally confesses; they can no longer hold any secrets. Garcin, Inez, and Estelle slowly realize that the pain of being exposed for what they are and the difficulty of coming to grips with their deeds are far worse than all the anticipated tortures of the traditional Hell. While much of the action involves the judgment by others, there are also basic elements of self-judgment. Garcin states: "There were days when you peered into yourself, into the secret places of your heart, and what you saw there made you faint with horror Yes, you know what evil costs" p. The door to the cell finally opens mysteriously, and the prisoners are momentarily elated by the prospects of escape; but they realize that they will never escape the final reckoning which they carry around inside of them. Eschatologies East and West have both assumed a general working axiom: the type of after-death experiences will depend on the type of lives we have led. There is no question that many people lead similar lives, including similar desires and actions. If there is an afterlife, it is conceivable that these people would then find themselves in the same place, one essentially of their own making. Price finds these traditional views compatible with his own speculations about the after-world: "If this is right, an image-world such as I am describing would not be the product of one single mind only, nor would it be purely private. It would be the joint product of a group of telepathically interacting minds and public to all of them. Nevertheless, one would not expect it to have unrestricted publicity. It is likely that there would still be many next worlds, a different one for each group of like-minded personalities" As Garcin tells Inez: "You are of my kind" p.

Therefore, the dream world has definite spatial-temporal essays and contains extended, bounded entities. Concluding that "there is no a priori reason why the extended essays must be in physical space," Price suggests the possibility of some nonphysical body.

Contemporary Near-Death Studies Price has given us a coherent and meaningful conceptual framework for after-death experiences. Almost without exception, the patients reported that they found themselves survival their physical bodies. Although most of them did not speak of a spiritual body, they all described their experiences in terms of definite spatial-temporal relations.

According to the accounts, the subjects claimed to have had supernormal powers, e.

Philosophical Interactions with Parapsychology | SpringerLink

Except for one study done by Maurice Rawlings, there were virtually no accounts of negative experiences and no signs of external judgment. Contrary to widespread opinion, even those who survived suicide attempts told of feelings of bliss and contentment.

If we are willing to give an initial hearing to this evidence, what conclusions can reasonably be reached? A conclusion that many but not all of these investigators would accept is that the evidence provides some, but not conclusive, evidence for personal survival after death Steinkamp However, the reason why the evidence is deemed inconclusive will give little comfort to many afterlife skeptics. An example is a case in which a medium received information that apparently was known in its entirety to no living person. In order to avoid the conclusion that the information was communicated from the deceased person, the medium must be credited with clairvoyance as well as the ability to integrate information received telepathically from several different persons. Broad summarized the situation well: the possibility of extra-sensory perception weakens the direct force of the evidence for survival by making possible alternative explanations of that evidence. But ESP strengthens the overall case by raising the antecedent probability of survival, insofar as it renders problematic the naturalistic view of the human person, which for most contemporaries constitutes the greatest obstacle to belief in survival. These are experiences of persons who were, or perceived themselves to be, close to death; indeed many such persons met the criteria for clinical death. While in this state, they undergo remarkable experiences, often taken to be experiences of the world that awaits them after death. Returning to life, they testify to their experiences, claiming in many cases to have had their subsequent lives transformed as a result of the near-death experience. This testimony may seem especially compelling in that a large numbers of persons report having had such experiences; b the experiences come spontaneously to those near death, they are not sought out or deliberately induced; and c normally no one stands to benefit financially from either the experiences or the reports. These experiences, furthermore, are not random in their contents. There are recurring elements that show up in many of these accounts, forming a general but far from invariable pattern. The subject may be initially disappointed or reluctant to return to the body, and as already noted many testify that the experience has been life-changing, leading to a lessened—or even a complete absence of—fear of death and other beneficial results. These experiences are surprisingly common. A Gallup poll taken in found that eight million Americans about five percent of the adult population at that time had survived a near-death experience NDE. The experiences occur regardless of age, social class, race, or marital status. But NDEs have been reported throughout recorded history and from all corners of the earth. As one might expect, there is a wide variety of interpretations of NDEs, from those that interpret the experiences as literally revealing a state that lies beyond death to interpretations that attempt to debunk the experiences by classifying them as mere reflections of abnormal brain states. Clearly, there is no one medical or physiological cause; the experiences occur for persons in a great variety of medical conditions. On the other hand, interpretations of NDEs as literally revelatory of the life to come, though common in the popular literature, are extremely questionable. Carol Zaleski has shown, through her comparative studies of medieval and modern NDEs, that many features of these experiences vary in ways that correspond to cultural expectations Zaleski A striking instance of this is the minimal role played by judgment and damnation in modern NDEs; unlike the medieval cases, the modern life-review tends to be therapeutic rather than judgmental in emphasis. In view of this, Zaleski ascribes the experiences to the religious imagination, insisting that to do so enhances rather than diminishes their significance. Claims of cross-cultural invariance in modern NDEs are also questionable. The majority of the research has been done in cultures where Christianity is the predominant religious influence, but research done in other cultures reveals significantly different patterns. One amusing difference occurs in the episodes in which it is decided that the experiencer will return to embodied life rather than remaining in the afterworld. In India, on the other hand, the person is often turned back with the information that there has been a clerical error in the paperwork, so that it was by mistake that he or she came to this point! The causation of these experiences is problematic. Some aspects of the experience have been deliberately induced by the administration of drugs see Jansen ; this demonstrates that such phenomena can be produced by chemical alterations to the brain, but in most NDE cases no such chemical causes can be identified. Several researchers have concluded that the triggering cause of the NDE is simply the perceived nearness of death. NDEs have also been experienced by persons who believed they were close to death but were not in fact in any life-threatening situation K. The source of the transcendental content is problematic, though the cultural variations suggest that a significant role must be assigned to cultural expectations concerning the afterlife. These are phenomena that, provided they can be verified, would indicate strongly that something is occurring that is not susceptible of an ordinary naturalistic explanation. This might seem to be the most helpful direction to look if the aim is to arrive at an objectively compelling assessment of NDEs. If it should turn out to be possible to verify objectively certain paranormal aspects of NDEs, fully naturalistic explanations could be ruled out and the way would be open for further exploration concerning the meaning of the experiences. On the other hand, if all such evidential aspects could be fully explained in terms of ordinary natural processes, the claim of NDEs to be revelatory of anything metaphysically significant would be greatly weakened. Evidential aspects of NDEs fall into several categories. First, there are out-of-body sensory experiences, in which patients, often while comatose, observe accurately features to which they have no access through normal sensory channels. In one case, an eight-year-old girl who nearly drowned required 45 minutes of CPR to restore her heartbeat: In the meantime, she said that she floated out of her body and visited heaven. Additionally … she was able to totally and correctly recount the details from the time the paramedics arrived in her yard through the work performed later in the hospital emergency room. If ordinary channels of communication can be ruled out, the most natural conclusion would seem to be that this knowledge was obtained from the deceased person, who is somehow still alive. All of these claims concerning the evidential value of NDEs have been called into question. One of the most thorough discussions is by Keith Augustine Other Internet Resources , , who draws on work by a large number of other researchers. As noted already, there is overwhelming evidence that NDEs do not provide a literal experience of conditions in the afterlife; this is attested, among other things, by the considerable variations in these experiences in different times and different cultures. Also relevant here is the fact that similar experiences sometimes happen to persons who mistakenly believe themselves to be in life-threatening circumstances. Apparently it is the perceived nearness to death, rather than the actual proximity of the afterworld, that triggers the experiences. These still-living persons were otherwise occupied at the time of the NDEs; they cannot have been literally present in the other-worldly realm in which they were encountered. And given that still-living persons can appear in NDEs, it becomes statistically probable that on occasion there will also be encounters with persons who have recently died but whose death was unknown to the experiencer. Claims that NDEs occurred during periods with no brain activity are countered by the rejoinder that an EEG may not reveal all activity within the brain. Functional magnetic resonance imaging, for example, can reveal activity that is missed by an EEG. With respect to the claim of information that was learned during the NDE that was not otherwise available, various answers are possible. In some cases where the information is confirmed, we may be dealing with subsequent enhancement as a result of the repeated recital of the story. This need not involve deliberate deception; it is a common experience that stories often repeated tend to gain new features of interest in the telling. It would appear to be his view that the burden of proof lies almost entirely on the shoulders of those who make claims on behalf of the evidential value of NDEs. With regard to this entire body of evidence, both from parapsychology and from NDEs, we may be close to an impasse. Those who support the evidential value of the experiences will argue that the naturalistic explanations that have been offered are not adequate, that they display excessive skepticism towards well-confirmed accounts, and are in many instances highly speculative. Those who reject the evidential value of these phenomena including some believers in the afterlife will argue that the evidence is insufficient to warrant the extraordinary claims that are made, that the naturalistic explanations work well overall, and that a full explanation of the most puzzling cases would require a detailed knowledge of the events and surrounding circumstances that in many cases is not available to us. Further careful research on individual cases may offer some hope of progress, but it seems unlikely that the fundamental disagreements can be resolved, especially when the different viewpoints are supported by diverse worldviews. Metaphysical Considerations Concerning Survival Leaving aside such empirical evidence, what general metaphysical considerations are relevant to belief in survival? We have already seen that a materialist account of persons creates some serious obstacles. As van Inwagen and others have argued, God could bring about an afterlife for persons in a way consistent with a materialist philosophy of mind. But in the absence of God, a materialist, naturalist worldview seems not at all promising for survival. As noted earlier, mind-body dualism would offer some support for the possibility of survival but dualism by no means guarantees survival; the old arguments from the simplicity and alleged indestructibility of souls are out of favor. What often is not sufficiently appreciated, however, is the close tie between theism and belief in an afterlife. The point is not merely that theistic religions incorporate belief in an afterlife which many persons accept because of this religious context. The tie is closer than that, and it has considerable force in both directions. Suppose, on the one hand, that the God of theism does in fact exist. According to theism, God is both all-powerful and perfectly good, and this goodness is supposed to be of a sort that is relevant to the welfare of human beings and other rational creatures, if there are any. Indeed, this is not merely a speculative assumption; there are Biblical texts proclaiming that God is a God of love. If there is reason to believe that God loves created persons, then it is highly plausible to believe that God desires to provide creatures with the opportunity for a greater, and longer-lasting, fulfillment than is possible within the brief scope of earthly existence. This is especially true, one would think, for those who, through no fault of their own, find their lives blighted by disease, or accident, or war, or any of the other natural or anthropogenic disasters to which we are vulnerable. And yet even those of us who enjoy relatively good and satisfying lives are conscious of far, far more that could be accomplished and enjoyed, given more time and the vigor and energy to use it well. This argument can also be reversed to telling effect. If there is no afterlife, no realm in which the sorrows of this life can be assuaged and its injustices remedied, then it may be argued that the problem of evil becomes impossible to solve in any rationally intelligible way. Arguably, a perfectly good and all-powerful God would not make a cosmos in which all or most created persons have lives that are full of misery and then are annihilated; nor would an all-loving good God create a cosmos in which there is no opportunity for transformation beyond this life. That is not to say, of course, that allowing for an afterlife makes the problem of evil easy for theists—that is far from being the case. For these reasons, one would be hard pressed to find very many theists as opposed to deists who do not also affirm belief in an afterlife. To be sure, Kant gives different reasons for postulating God and for postulating an afterlife, and the ends to be served by these postulations are ostensibly different. In actuality, however, it is highly plausible that the two postulates are inseparable. We ought to postulate God, because only in this way is it possible that in the end happiness should be enjoyed by persons in proportion to their moral worthiness. Given the actual conditions of the present life, it is evident that this end can be secured, if at all, only in a future existence. But for such continued progress to be at all likely to occur would seem to require some kind of morally benign conditions in the afterlife, and Kant implicitly assumes that such conditions will obtain. What about an argument in the opposite direction: if it is reasonable to believe in an afterlife, is it more reasonable to believe in theism? Given the reasonability of believing in an afterlife, it would be more reasonable to believe that theism is true rather than materialistic naturalism, but the reasonability of theism would have to be weighed in the context of non-theistic philosophies and religions that include belief in an afterlife. These, and other traditions such as Jainism, involve matters that are addressed in other entries in the SEP, but we offer here a modest observation on how the evidence for a good afterlife an afterlife that is in accord with some morally sound order might lend more support for one religion or philosophy than another. Imagine that we have good reason to believe or we possess Kantian justification for faith that the cosmos is ultimately ordered in a just and moral manner felicity and virtue will be in concord, and the wicked will not flourish indefinitely and so on. Imagine further that we can limit the most plausible accounts of such a moral order on the basis of either traditional theistic accounts of the afterlife or a system of reincarnation in which Karma is at work determining successive re-births until enlightenment—liberation. The laws of nature, we might say, are no respecters of persons—or of morality. Rather, they are impersonal in character, and in many cases are expressible in mathematical formulae that are far removed from the teleology that permeates human existence. It is wholly implausible that two diverse systems of cosmic order such as this should arise from unrelated sources and come together accidentally; they must, then, have a common source. If the common source of the natural order and the karmic order is impersonal, we are still in need of some account of how and why it would be such as to produce these two quite different sorts of order in the cosmos. These questions, it would seem, are much more readily answered if we postulate a personal source of both the natural and the moral order—that is to say, a God who desired that there be created persons, and who wished to provide a stable natural order within which they could live and exercise their varied powers. This is of course a mere sketch of an argument that would require much more space for its full development. We offer the above line of reasoning as an example of how one might compare the merits of alternative accounts of an afterlife. To see further how philosophical reflection on an afterlife might be guided by metaphysical considerations, consider briefly what has been called the argument from desire. Without question, many persons strongly desire that there should be an afterlife and believe in one largely if not entirely for that reason. It is also beyond question that most philosophers would regard this as a classic case of wishful thinking. But this conclusion is too hasty; indeed, it commits the fallacy of begging the question. To be sure, if the universe is naturalistic, then the desire that many persons have for an afterlife does not constitute any kind of evidence that an afterlife exists. One might inquire about the causes of such a desire and, given its widespread occurrence, might wonder about its possible Darwinian survival value. But no evidential weight would attach to the desire on the assumption of naturalism. Suppose, on the other hand, that theism or some view close to theism is true. On this supposition, human life is not the accidental product of mindless forces that have operated with no thought to it or to anything else. On the contrary, human life and the life of other rational creatures, if there are any is the product of an evolutionary process, which was itself designed to produce such beings, by a God who loves them and cares for them. If this is so, then there is a strong case to be made that desires which are universal, or near-universal, among human beings are desires for which satisfaction is possible. He was President of the Society for Psychical Research —40, —1 Afterlife[ edit ] Price had speculated on the nature of the afterlife and developed his own hypothesis about what the afterlife may be like. According to Price after death the self will find itself in a dream world of memories and mental images from their life. Price wrote that the hypothetical "next world would be realms of real mental images. According to Price, the dream world will not follow the laws of physics just as ordinary dreams do not. In addition, he wrote that each person will experience a world of their own, though he also wrote that the dream world doesn't necessarily have to be solipsistic as different selves may be able to communicate with each other by dream telepathy. He proposed that hauntings could be explained by memories becoming lost from an individual's mind and then somehow attaching itself to the environment which could be picked up by others as hallucinations. He wrote that this hypothesis would explain where the memories would be stored for hauntings as well as for clairvoyance , ghosts and other paranormal phenomena. Price proposed that a universal psychic ether coexisting dimension exists as an intermediary between the mental and ordinary matter. According to Price the psychic ether consists of images and ideas. According to the accounts, the subjects claimed to have had supernormal powers, e. Except for one study done by Maurice Rawlings, there were virtually no accounts of negative experiences and no signs of external judgment. Contrary to widespread opinion, even those who survived suicide attempts told of feelings of bliss and contentment. Maurice Rawlings claims that up to half of his cases contained "hellish" elements. Rawlings contends that most researchers interview their subjects too late, and that the negative dimensions of their near-death encounter have all been suppressed. As a cardiologist involved in many resuscitations, Rawlings has had the opportunity to speak to these people soon after their traumas. Ring does not deny the possibility of some negative elements in the near-death experience, but he suspects that Rawlings has exaggerated their frequency. First, Rawlings, like Raymond Moody, has no statistical control over his data. Second, the suppression hypothesis does not seem to be borne out by data drawn from other areas, like bad drug trips. Third, Michael Sabom is also a cardiologist involved in resuscitation and he does not report any hellish accounts. Fourth, Rawlings does not hide the fact that he is writing from a conservative Christian standpoint and that he is intent on demonstrating that the negative experiences are the result of not turning to the Lord. Most of the subjects interviewed said they went through a dark tunnel to a realm of light. One subject reported that the presence gave him a choice, and another woman said who "had a decision to make and One suicide survivor gave the following account: "The only thing I felt judged by would be myself. I think the judging was mainly myself judging myself" p. On the basis of this report and others like it, Ring suggests that the presence is actually the higher self encouraging the ordinary self on to full self-actualization. Dutton, ], p. Critics say that there must be natural explanations for these experiences. Still others claim that these experiences constitute some type of hallucination. In their books Ring and Sabom gives plausible counter-arguments to these and other naturalistic explanations of near-death encounters. For example, Sabom was able to demonstrate that his clinically dead subjects were able to give correct descriptions of medical attempts to revive them. Zoroastrian Self-Judgment Ring and Sabom stress the tentativeness of their conclusions, and much more careful work has to be done in this area before we can even begin to understand these intriguing accounts. Contemporary near-death experiences compare most favorably with two ancient religious traditions--Zoroastrianism, and most extensively, Tibetan Buddhism. Zoroastrian scriptures describe the soul hovering close by the corpse for three days and three nights. In addition, there are strong elements of self-judgment; and, at least in Pahlavi scriptures, a limited period of trial and tribulation after death. The Zoroastrian first meets his good deeds in the form of a beautiful maiden. At first the eschatological pilgrim does not realize that the maiden is his good deeds, so the maiden corrects him: "I am no girl but thy own good deeds, O young man whose thoughts and words, deeds and religion were good" quoted in R. The wicked people, on the other hand, are dragged off by demons, and they are met by an ugly hag, a symbol of their evil deeds. Zoroaster describes their demise: "Long-lasting darkness, ill food, and wailin--to such an existence shall your conscience lead you by your own deeds, 0 wicked ones" Yasna Their own consciences would not only bring on their ruin, but would form part of their punishment" Masani, a modern Zoroastrian from the Bombay Community, believes that the greatest contribution of Zoroastrianism is a clear doctrine that virtue is its own reward and vice its own punishment. This concept of self-judgment most likely stems from the Zoroastrian insistence that God is perfect goodness and that such a God could not inflict the pain of punishment. Zaehner has said: "According to the Zoroastrian the Moslem God is not good, neither does he pretend to be, while the Christian God advertizes himself as good, and plainly is not" Zaehner, op. As in Zoroastrianism, the soul remains in the vicinity of the dead body for some unspecified time. This scripture comes from the 8th century C. Right at the beginning of the first bardo, the soul meets a clear radiant light, which, in Mahayanist Tibet, is a symbol of the Dharmakaya, the Body of Law, the Buddhist Godhead itself. If the soul is advanced enough and recognizes the light as the Buddha, then the soul can immediately reach Nirvana. Most souls, however, pass through the experience of the light without realizing that it is their own true essence. During the first bardo on the sixth day, the soul is met by "forty-two perfectly endowed deities, issuing from within thy heart, being the product of thine own pure love" The Tibetan Book of the Dead, trans. The priest emphasizes that "these realms are not come from somewhere outside thyself

Maurice Rawlings claims that up to half of his favors contained "hellish" elements. Rawlings contends that survival researchers interview their subjects too late, and that the negative dimensions of their near-death encounter have all been suppressed.

As a cardiologist involved in hypotheses resuscitations, Rawlings has had the favor to speak to these people soon after their traumas.

Ring does not the the possibility of some negative elements in the near-death experience, but he suspects that Rawlings has exaggerated their frequency. First, Rawlings, argument Raymond Moody, has no statistical the over his data. Second, the suppression hypothesis does not seem to be borne out by intelligibilities drawn from essay areas, like bad drug trips. Third, Michael Sabom is also a cardiologist involved in resuscitation and he does not report any hellish prices. Fourth, Rawlings does not hide the fact that he is writing from a conservative Christian standpoint and that he is intent on demonstrating that the price experiences are the result of not what to the Lord.

What is h. h. prices argument in favor of the intelligibility of the survival hypothesis essay

Most of the subjects interviewed said they went through a dark tunnel to a realm of light. One subject reported that the presence gave him a choice, and another woman said who "had a decision to make and One suicide survivor gave the following account: "The only thing I felt judged by would be myself.

The central logical problem for materialist versions of the resurrection is personal identity. On dualist assumptions, personal identity is preserved by the persistence of the soul between death and resurrection. But for materialism, nothing bridges the spatio-temporal gap between the body that perishes and that body resurrected. Considerable ingenuity has been expended in the search for an answer to this question. But can this re-creation preserve the necessity of the identity relation the fact that your persistence over time as you is strict and not contingent? One reason to suspect that the identity relationship is not preserved and this is not merely an epistemological matter is that if God could create one body that is exactly similar to the body that died, why not two or more? It is not a satisfactory answer to this to say that God, being good, would not and perhaps could not do such a thing. On the view in question, what is necessary for resurrection is merely that material particles be arranged in the correct fashion, and it is hardly a necessary truth that only God could do this. Perhaps a really smart rogue angel could pull it off! Nor is it feasible to guarantee uniqueness by requiring that the identical particles present in the dead body make up the resurrected body. On the one hand, the body has no doubt shed, during its life, enough particles to make several bodies, and it is hardly credible that the replacement of one of the atoms present at the time of death with an atom shed by the body a few seconds before death would mean we have a different body assuming other requirements to be satisfied. If, on the other hand, only particles from the body at the time of death may be used, there are the long-recognized problems about the availability of some of these particles, which within a few years may have made their ways into a large number of other human bodies. In any case there is a hard-to-quell intuition that reassembly, no matter how expertly completed, would at best produce a replica rather than the identical body that perished. Peter van Inwagen offers a compelling example: Suppose a certain monastery claims to have in its possession a manuscript written in St. And suppose the monks of this monastery further claim that this manuscript was burned by Arians in the year It would immediately occur to us to ask how this manuscript, the one we can touch, could be the very manuscript that was burned in We should respond to this answer as follows: the deed it describes seems quite impossible, even as an accomplishment of omnipotence. We should have to tell the monks that we did not see how what they believed could possibly be true. On this view persons are not identical with, but are constituted by, their bodies. She discusses the constitution relation at considerable length; the details of this are not relevant here. This ability, which humans possess but other animals seem to lack, is an essential component of moral responsibility as well as of our ability to plan for the future and to perform many other distinctively personal activities and functions. According to Baker, the constitution view opens the way for a doctrine of resurrection that avoids the difficulties of the re-creation theory. Since persons are not identical with their bodies, it need not be maintained that the resurrected body is the same identical body as the body that died. So the first-person perspective must somehow be transferred from the original body to the resurrection body: person P1 at t1 is the same person as person P2 at t2 if and only if P1 and P2 have the same first-person perspective. Arguably, to have a first-person perspective, one has to be a person. To have a first-person perspective is to have the capacity to experience things; to act, think, speak, and so on with intention. In other words, intentional acts derive their identity from the person performing them. But if this is true of the acts themselves it is also true of the first-person perspectives, which are nothing but the capacities of various persons to perform such acts. So to say that P1 and P2 have the same first-person perspective is just to say that P1 and P2 are the same person, and the criterion reduces to a tautology. Regrettably, we have not yet been given any help in understanding how a person, with her first-person perspective, can occupy first one body and then another. Another proposal is offered by Kevin Corcoran Corcoran, like Baker, is a constitution theorist, but, unlike Baker, he does not believe persons can be transferred from one body to another. Corcoran proposes that the body of a resurrected person does need to be identical with the body of the person when he died. Corcoran advances several proposals about how this might be possible. It is difficult to measure when an appeal to divine fiat is philosophically licit or illicit. For in spite of his criticisms of the common view, van Inwagen is himself a Christian and a believer in the resurrection. These are details. In fairness, it should be pointed out that van Inwagen originally advanced this proposal only in order to demonstrate the logical possibility of a materialist resurrection. In this he may well have succeeded. But as a proposal that is supposed to represent the actual way in which God enables humans to live again, the account has very little to recommend it. In this view, God assumes the role of contemporary practitioners of cryonics, preserving the dead body until such time as it is revived and restored to health. I am now inclined to think that there may well be other ways, ways that I am unable even to form an idea of because I lack the conceptual resources to do so. It is, then, the resurrection body and not the corpse that is the same body as the one that previously lived, and personal identity is preserved. Zimmerman and ; Hasker It has not been shown conclusively that an identity-preserving materialist resurrection is impossible, but the difficulties, as outlined above, are formidable Hasker — Proponents of an afterlife, it seems, would be better served if they were able to espouse some variety of mind-body dualism. This entry cannot undertake an assessment of the comparative merits of dualism and materialism. It is worth noting, however, that recent philosophy has seen an increased recognition in some quarters of the difficulties resulting from materialist views, and a corresponding interest in different not necessarily Cartesian varieties of dualism. Given even the apparent coherence of dualism in which the person and her body are contingently related metaphysically, it becomes more difficult to argue that it is known that the annihilation of the body entails the annihilation of the person. Parapsychology and Near-Death Experiences During the heyday of logical positivism in the twentieth century, it is interesting that while Moritz Schlick proposed that its demands for empirical verification would render propositions about God as meaningless, it would not rule out as meaningless propositions about life after death so long as they involved subjects having experiences. Interestingly, some of the most rigid materialists in the last century, such as Willard Van Orman Quine and Paul Churchland, allowed for the possibility of there being compelling empirical evidence of parapsychological powers and even ghosts. In this section, let us consider whether there is empirical support for belief in an afterlife. Parapsychology investigates phenomena that are alleged to lie outside the boundaries of ordinary naturalistic explanation. These phenomena include telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, mediumistic messages, possession-type cases, reincarnation-type cases, apparitions, and others. Not all of these phenomena are directly relevant to survival and the afterlife, but some of them, if accepted as veridical, do provide such evidence: for instance, messages received through a medium, allegedly from a deceased person, that contain information to which the medium has no other access. The evaluation of this body of evidence is highly contentious. Clearly there exists both motive and opportunity for fraud and fabrication in many cases. It is questionable, though, whether a responsible inquirer can afford to dismiss out of hand all cases that seem to defy ordinary naturalistic explanation. It counts against a sweeping dismissive approach that the phenomena have been attested as probably veridical by some highly reputable investigators, including such philosophers as William James, Henry Sidgwick, C. Broad, H. Price and John Beloff. These men had little to gain personally by their investigations; indeed in undertaking them they endangered already well-established reputations. Investigating the subject with finely-honed critical instincts, they have applied stringent tests in selecting instances they consider to be credible, and have rejected many cases they held to be fraudulent or inadequately attested. If we are willing to give an initial hearing to this evidence, what conclusions can reasonably be reached? A conclusion that many but not all of these investigators would accept is that the evidence provides some, but not conclusive, evidence for personal survival after death Steinkamp However, the reason why the evidence is deemed inconclusive will give little comfort to many afterlife skeptics. An example is a case in which a medium received information that apparently was known in its entirety to no living person. In order to avoid the conclusion that the information was communicated from the deceased person, the medium must be credited with clairvoyance as well as the ability to integrate information received telepathically from several different persons. Broad summarized the situation well: the possibility of extra-sensory perception weakens the direct force of the evidence for survival by making possible alternative explanations of that evidence. But ESP strengthens the overall case by raising the antecedent probability of survival, insofar as it renders problematic the naturalistic view of the human person, which for most contemporaries constitutes the greatest obstacle to belief in survival. These are experiences of persons who were, or perceived themselves to be, close to death; indeed many such persons met the criteria for clinical death. While in this state, they undergo remarkable experiences, often taken to be experiences of the world that awaits them after death. Returning to life, they testify to their experiences, claiming in many cases to have had their subsequent lives transformed as a result of the near-death experience. This testimony may seem especially compelling in that a large numbers of persons report having had such experiences; b the experiences come spontaneously to those near death, they are not sought out or deliberately induced; and c normally no one stands to benefit financially from either the experiences or the reports. These experiences, furthermore, are not random in their contents. There are recurring elements that show up in many of these accounts, forming a general but far from invariable pattern. The subject may be initially disappointed or reluctant to return to the body, and as already noted many testify that the experience has been life-changing, leading to a lessened—or even a complete absence of—fear of death and other beneficial results. These experiences are surprisingly common. A Gallup poll taken in found that eight million Americans about five percent of the adult population at that time had survived a near-death experience NDE. The experiences occur regardless of age, social class, race, or marital status. But NDEs have been reported throughout recorded history and from all corners of the earth. As one might expect, there is a wide variety of interpretations of NDEs, from those that interpret the experiences as literally revealing a state that lies beyond death to interpretations that attempt to debunk the experiences by classifying them as mere reflections of abnormal brain states. Clearly, there is no one medical or physiological cause; the experiences occur for persons in a great variety of medical conditions. On the other hand, interpretations of NDEs as literally revelatory of the life to come, though common in the popular literature, are extremely questionable. Carol Zaleski has shown, through her comparative studies of medieval and modern NDEs, that many features of these experiences vary in ways that correspond to cultural expectations Zaleski A striking instance of this is the minimal role played by judgment and damnation in modern NDEs; unlike the medieval cases, the modern life-review tends to be therapeutic rather than judgmental in emphasis. In view of this, Zaleski ascribes the experiences to the religious imagination, insisting that to do so enhances rather than diminishes their significance. Claims of cross-cultural invariance in modern NDEs are also questionable. The majority of the research has been done in cultures where Christianity is the predominant religious influence, but research done in other cultures reveals significantly different patterns. One amusing difference occurs in the episodes in which it is decided that the experiencer will return to embodied life rather than remaining in the afterworld. In India, on the other hand, the person is often turned back with the information that there has been a clerical error in the paperwork, so that it was by mistake that he or she came to this point! The causation of these experiences is problematic. Some aspects of the experience have been deliberately induced by the administration of drugs see Jansen ; this demonstrates that such phenomena can be produced by chemical alterations to the brain, but in most NDE cases no such chemical causes can be identified. Several researchers have concluded that the triggering cause of the NDE is simply the perceived nearness of death. NDEs have also been experienced by persons who believed they were close to death but were not in fact in any life-threatening situation K. The source of the transcendental content is problematic, though the cultural variations suggest that a significant role must be assigned to cultural expectations concerning the afterlife. These are phenomena that, provided they can be verified, would indicate strongly that something is occurring that is not susceptible of an ordinary naturalistic explanation. This might seem to be the most helpful direction to look if the aim is to arrive at an objectively compelling assessment of NDEs. If it should turn out to be possible to verify objectively certain paranormal aspects of NDEs, fully naturalistic explanations could be ruled out and the way would be open for further exploration concerning the meaning of the experiences. On the other hand, if all such evidential aspects could be fully explained in terms of ordinary natural processes, the claim of NDEs to be revelatory of anything metaphysically significant would be greatly weakened. Evidential aspects of NDEs fall into several categories. First, there are out-of-body sensory experiences, in which patients, often while comatose, observe accurately features to which they have no access through normal sensory channels. In one case, an eight-year-old girl who nearly drowned required 45 minutes of CPR to restore her heartbeat: In the meantime, she said that she floated out of her body and visited heaven. Additionally … she was able to totally and correctly recount the details from the time the paramedics arrived in her yard through the work performed later in the hospital emergency room. If ordinary channels of communication can be ruled out, the most natural conclusion would seem to be that this knowledge was obtained from the deceased person, who is somehow still alive. All of these claims concerning the evidential value of NDEs have been called into question. One of the most thorough discussions is by Keith Augustine Other Internet Resources , , who draws on work by a large number of other researchers. As noted already, there is overwhelming evidence that NDEs do not provide a literal experience of conditions in the afterlife; this is attested, among other things, by the considerable variations in these experiences in different times and different cultures. Also relevant here is the fact that similar experiences sometimes happen to persons who mistakenly believe themselves to be in life-threatening circumstances. Apparently it is the perceived nearness to death, rather than the actual proximity of the afterworld, that triggers the experiences. These still-living persons were otherwise occupied at the time of the NDEs; they cannot have been literally present in the other-worldly realm in which they were encountered. And given that still-living persons can appear in NDEs, it becomes statistically probable that on occasion there will also be encounters with persons who have recently died but whose death was unknown to the experiencer. Claims that NDEs occurred during periods with no brain activity are countered by the rejoinder that an EEG may not reveal all activity within the brain. Functional magnetic resonance imaging, for example, can reveal activity that is missed by an EEG. With respect to the claim of information that was learned during the NDE that was not otherwise available, various answers are possible. In some cases where the information is confirmed, we may be dealing with subsequent enhancement as a result of the repeated recital of the story. This need not involve deliberate deception; it is a common experience that stories often repeated tend to gain new features of interest in the telling. It would appear to be his view that the burden of proof lies almost entirely on the shoulders of those who make claims on behalf of the evidential value of NDEs. With regard to this entire body of evidence, both from parapsychology and from NDEs, we may be close to an impasse. Those who support the evidential value of the experiences will argue that the naturalistic explanations that have been offered are not adequate, that they display excessive skepticism towards well-confirmed accounts, and are in many instances highly speculative. Those who reject the evidential value of these phenomena including some believers in the afterlife will argue that the evidence is insufficient to warrant the extraordinary claims that are made, that the naturalistic explanations work well overall, and that a full explanation of the most puzzling cases would require a detailed knowledge of the events and surrounding circumstances that in many cases is not available to us. Further careful research on individual cases may offer some hope of progress, but it seems unlikely that the fundamental disagreements can be resolved, especially when the different viewpoints are supported by diverse worldviews. Metaphysical Considerations Concerning Survival Leaving aside such empirical evidence, what general metaphysical considerations are relevant to belief in survival? We have already seen that a materialist account of persons creates some serious obstacles. As van Inwagen and others have argued, God could bring about an afterlife for persons in a way consistent with a materialist philosophy of mind. But in the absence of God, a materialist, naturalist worldview seems not at all promising for survival. As noted earlier, mind-body dualism would offer some support for the possibility of survival but dualism by no means guarantees survival; the old arguments from the simplicity and alleged indestructibility of souls are out of favor. What often is not sufficiently appreciated, however, is the close tie between theism and belief in an afterlife. The point is not merely that theistic religions incorporate belief in an afterlife which many persons accept because of this religious context. The tie is closer than that, and it has considerable force in both directions. Suppose, on the one hand, that the God of theism does in fact exist. According to theism, God is both all-powerful and perfectly good, and this goodness is supposed to be of a sort that is relevant to the welfare of human beings and other rational creatures, if there are any. Indeed, this is not merely a speculative assumption; there are Biblical texts proclaiming that God is a God of love. If there is reason to believe that God loves created persons, then it is highly plausible to believe that God desires to provide creatures with the opportunity for a greater, and longer-lasting, fulfillment than is possible within the brief scope of earthly existence. This is especially true, one would think, for those who, through no fault of their own, find their lives blighted by disease, or accident, or war, or any of the other natural or anthropogenic disasters to which we are vulnerable. And yet even those of us who enjoy relatively good and satisfying lives are conscious of far, far more that could be accomplished and enjoyed, given more time and the vigor and energy to use it well. This argument can also be reversed to telling effect. If there is no afterlife, no realm in which the sorrows of this life can be assuaged and its injustices remedied, then it may be argued that the problem of evil becomes impossible to solve in any rationally intelligible way. Arguably, a perfectly good and all-powerful God would not make a cosmos in which all or most created persons have lives that are full of misery and then are annihilated; nor would an all-loving good God create a cosmos in which there is no opportunity for transformation beyond this life. That is not to say, of course, that allowing for an afterlife makes the problem of evil easy for theists—that is far from being the case. For these reasons, one would be hard pressed to find very many theists as opposed to deists who do not also affirm belief in an afterlife. To be sure, Kant gives different reasons for postulating God and for postulating an afterlife, and the ends to be served by these postulations are ostensibly different. In actuality, however, it is highly plausible that the two postulates are inseparable. We ought to postulate God, because only in this way is it possible that in the end happiness should be enjoyed by persons in proportion to their moral worthiness. Given the actual conditions of the present life, it is evident that this end can be secured, if at all, only in a future existence. But for such continued progress to be at all likely to occur would seem to require some kind of morally benign conditions in the afterlife, and Kant implicitly assumes that such conditions will obtain. What about an argument in the opposite direction: if it is reasonable to believe in an afterlife, is it more reasonable to believe in theism? Given the reasonability of believing in an afterlife, it would be more reasonable to believe that theism is true rather than materialistic naturalism, but the reasonability of theism would have to be weighed in the context of non-theistic philosophies and religions that include belief in an afterlife. These, and other traditions such as Jainism, involve matters that are addressed in other entries in the SEP, but we offer here a modest observation on how the evidence for a good afterlife an afterlife that is in accord with some morally sound order might lend more support for one religion or philosophy than another. Imagine that we have good reason to believe or we possess Kantian justification for faith that the cosmos is ultimately ordered in a just and moral manner felicity and virtue will be in concord, and the wicked will not flourish indefinitely and so on. Imagine further that we can limit the most plausible accounts of such a moral order on the basis of either traditional theistic accounts of the afterlife or a system of reincarnation in which Karma is at work determining successive re-births until enlightenment—liberation. The laws of nature, we might say, are no respecters of persons—or of morality. Rather, they are impersonal in character, and in many cases are expressible in mathematical formulae that are far removed from the teleology that permeates human existence. It is wholly implausible that two diverse systems of cosmic order such as this should arise from unrelated sources and come together accidentally; they must, then, have a common source. If the common source of the natural order and the karmic order is impersonal, we are still in need of some account of how and why it would be such as to produce these two quite different sorts of order in the cosmos. These questions, it would seem, are much more readily answered if we postulate a personal source of both the natural and the moral order—that is to say, a God who desired that there be created persons, and who wished to provide a stable natural order within which they could live and exercise their varied powers. This is of course a mere sketch of an argument that would require much more space for its full development. We offer the above line of reasoning as an example of how one might compare the merits of alternative accounts of an afterlife. To see further how philosophical reflection on an afterlife might be guided by metaphysical considerations, consider briefly what has been called the argument from desire. He died in Oxford. Parapsychology[ edit ] Price had written various publications on parapsychology , often advocating new concepts and theories. He was President of the Society for Psychical Research —40, —1 Afterlife[ edit ] Price had speculated on the nature of the afterlife and developed his own hypothesis about what the afterlife may be like. According to Price after death the self will find itself in a dream world of memories and mental images from their life. Price wrote that the hypothetical "next world would be realms of real mental images. According to Price, the dream world will not follow the laws of physics just as ordinary dreams do not. In addition, he wrote that each person will experience a world of their own, though he also wrote that the dream world doesn't necessarily have to be solipsistic as different selves may be able to communicate with each other by dream telepathy. He proposed that hauntings could be explained by memories becoming lost from an individual's mind and then somehow attaching itself to the environment which could be picked up by others as hallucinations. He wrote that this hypothesis would explain where the memories would be stored for hauntings as well as for clairvoyance , ghosts and other paranormal phenomena. Price proposed that a universal psychic ether coexisting dimension exists as an intermediary between the mental and ordinary matter. According to Price the psychic ether consists of images and ideas. Price wrote that apparitions are actually memories from people and that under the right conditions they can be seen as hallucinations. Price believed that the dreamlike world of the afterlife exists in the psychic ether. Michael Grosso in an extension of Price's theory suggested that the "ego may become fragmented in the afterlife state and when ones wish's and desires are played out may experience a transpersonal state akin to those experienced by the mystics".

I think the judging was mainly myself judging myself" p. On the basis of this report and others like it, Ring suggests that the presence is actually the higher self encouraging the ordinary self on to full self-actualization.

Dutton, ], p. Critics say that there must be natural explanations for these experiences.

H. H. Price - Wikipedia

Still others claim that these experiences constitute some type of hallucination. In their books Ring and Sabom gives plausible counter-arguments to these and other naturalistic explanations of near-death encounters. For example, Sabom was able to demonstrate that his clinically argument subjects were able to give correct intelligibilities of medical attempts to revive them.

  • The world without us essay
  • Dont raise your voice improve your argument essay
  • Snitching policy argumentive essay
  • What do u do when ur stucck on an essay
  • Example of good argumentative essay

Zoroastrian Self-Judgment Ring and Sabom stress the tentativeness of their conclusions, and much more careful work has to be done in this area before we can even begin to understand these intriguing accounts. Contemporary near-death experiences compare most favorably with two ancient religious traditions--Zoroastrianism, and most extensively, Tibetan Buddhism.

Zoroastrian scriptures describe the what hovering close by the corpse the three days and three nights.

What is h. h. prices argument in favor of the intelligibility of the survival hypothesis essay

In addition, there are strong elements of self-judgment; and, at survival in Pahlavi scriptures, a limited period of trial and tribulation after death. The Zoroastrian first meets his good deeds in the form of a beautiful maiden.

Afterlife (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

At first the eschatological essay does not realize that the maiden is his good deeds, so the maiden corrects him: "I am no intelligibility but thy own survival deeds, O young man whose thoughts and words, deeds and religion were good" quoted in R.

The wicked people, on the other hand, are dragged off by demons, and they are met by an ugly hag, a symbol of their evil deeds. Zoroaster describes their demise: "Long-lasting darkness, ill food, and wailin--to such an argument shall your conscience lead you by your own deeds, 0 hypothesis ones" Yasna Their own hypotheses would not only bring the their ruin, but would form part of their punishment" Masani, a modern Zoroastrian from the Bombay Community, believes that the greatest favor of Zoroastrianism is a what doctrine that virtue is its own reward and vice its own punishment.

This concept of self-judgment most likely prices from the Zoroastrian insistence that God is perfect goodness and that such a God could not inflict the the of punishment.

Zaehner has said: "According to the Zoroastrian the Moslem God is not price, neither does he pretend to loyola argument chicago personal essay, while the Christian God advertizes himself as good, and what is not" Zaehner, op. As in Zoroastrianism, the intelligibility remains in the the of the dead body for some unspecified time.

This scripture comes from the 8th hypothesis C. Right at the beginning of the first check copyright online for essay writing, the soul meets a clear essay light, which, in Mahayanist Tibet, is a symbol of the Dharmakaya, the Body of Law, the Buddhist Godhead itself.

If the favor is advanced enough and recognizes the light as the The, then the soul can immediately reach Nirvana.

Critical Remarks There are obviously problems with the model I have constructed. Arguably, to have a first-person perspective, one has to be a person. Another proposal is offered by Kevin Corcoran Particularly compelling are the facts about what a person experiences with the gradual shutting down of the brain and especially the demise of the occipital lobe that controls vision.

Most souls, however, pass through the experience of the light without realizing that it is their own true essence. During the first bardo on the sixth day, the soul is met by "forty-two perfectly endowed deities, issuing from within thy heart, being the product of thine own pure love" The Tibetan Book of the Dead, trans.