What is Death?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Eureka.
A post on topic.

On similar theme :
For those who studied the source I suggested , they will know that
1/ the supposed window of minutes to avoid brain damage on cardiac patients arrest is because of oxygen toxicity ( ie repurfusion) , so Traditional methods of bringing back from arrest - oxygen too quickly- are part of the problem .
2/ that with the right chemical mix, and progressive repurfusion, entire pig brains have been brought back to function after several days in a slaughter house , and that human cadaver neural cells have also been cultured to around the size of foetus brains.
So the supposed need for rapid organ harvesting after death May not be necessary with the right treatment.

But is the brain still responsive to stimuli in that situation though?

 

[mindlight]

There are many discussions on origin of life here.
Which begs the question what is life?

One parallel aspect of this should get more attention, is so What then is death?

At one time medical definitions were easier , because the ability to resussitate after a heart stopping was very limited.

Now as body function can be restored by shock, and machines can take over some functions , now medicine admits the answer is far from clear, and definitions also focus on brain function, but even that can seemingly cease and restart.

I am not going to reproduce any medical definitions or the difficulties in them here , I will let medics do that.

But I do suggest all read Dr Sam parnias “lucid dying “ as a summary of where we are at Medically.

The conclusion is consciousness is life, “ the part of you that says I am”
And that is not just a function of brain, and in as far as anyone can tell lives on after bodily death.
sonetimes it can come back to otherwise lifeless bodies. Sometimes not. The machine is turned off.

Consviousness beyond life - van lommel - explores Medical arguments and presents scientifuc longitudinal studies that so called out of body experiences are not hallucination, drug, anoxia or faith influenced Actual stats based on entire cardiac arrest populations, dont support any of the lazy assumptions.

I just urge all to study the subject . It is important because if life is consciousness “ soul” for what if a better word, and not just chemistry , all bets are off on the usual narrative on origin of life.

A biological answer would be the cessation of bodily functions associated with a viable living organism and the subsequent decay when those functions cease.

Studies of near death experiences suggest an extra dimension that is observable by the subject that experiences clinical death and then restoration and can describe the intervening time period. On occasions details of activities in the operating theatre have been shared which should not have been possible.

There are two main non- material answers:

1) The religious one - the soul
2) The notion that consciousness could be uploaded and that a coherent personality continue to exist after their body dies as a ghost in the machine.

Science can only observe 1) through witness testimony and so this is mainly out of scope of the scientific method and more a primary source historical analysis.

2) Has yet to be demonstrated and so remains a speculation.

 

[Mountainmike]

Whatever it is, I can do without it. I am not interested in complements or condescension or respect, or your assessments of me.

It is not misery, it is disdain.

I did no such thing. Neurobiology is a relatively young field and a complex one. Many of the old case studies of the kinds of things you have posted in the past on NDEs, OBEs, etc., have been checked with more rigorous tests. That you were building your "case" on the backs of the reputations of researchers who haven't been active in decades was suspicious (and a bit surprising).

I never engaged you on this thread, I responded to someone else. There is nothing useful to be had in discussing consciousness or mind with you or a few other posters here.

I'm not interested in your amateur psychology anymore than your other amateur science assessments.

I was not building a case on the laureates , I was simply noting that the idea that the consciousness is not just a process of the brain , has been a consistent theme and conclusion amongst researchers across a variety of disciplines for a century, for many reasons not just one. Also that the researchers involved are not quacks.

Your comments on NDE are very illinformed.

But since you cannot conduct a civil discussion on science of death, get off my thread.

 

[Larniavc]

there are a lot of researchers involved two of which Are Nobel laureates who have concluded consciousness is not just a process of the brain

Are you referring to Sir John Carew Eccles and F.A. Popp?

 

[Mountainmike]

Are you referring to Sir John Carew Eccles and F.A. Popp?

We’ve covered this .
The first was Sherrington his work continued by wilder penfield . Get the book, it’s fascinating , his conclusions summed up in van lommels book)
his conclusions come from how the conscious brain in open brain surgery responds to electrical stimulation .

And yes, John eccles .

When hans tried to say it is “ old hat“, I pointed out that Eccles wrote his book “ how the self controls its brain” in 94
a full 20 years after clauser confirmed the bell experiments on quantum entaglement ( broadly about the role of observation in outcome) to get his recent nobel prize. No doubt that is viewed as current. Confirmed in books such as through two doors at once.

So Eccles is recent in that regard..

I only mentioned laureates to demonstrate it wasn’t quack or fringe opinion , not because their work should be the prime focus.

There are many medical researchers across multiple disciplines , coming from different aspects of the problem who think consciousness cannot just be a process of brains, laureates are rare. There are neurosurgeons today who think the same.

Parnias book commences by study of the idea that body death is not at all well defined.
So the question of life is really about consciousness, or as Eccles puts it “ the experiencing self”

 

[Larniavc]

No doubt that is viewed as current.

1994 is not current. Not by a long shot.

 

[Larniavc]

I only mentioned laureates to demonstrate it wasn’t quack or fringe opinion

It is though. It is very definitely a fringe opinion.

You see if a NDE occurs one is not actually dead so it does not count as we cannot rule out hallucinations.

If one is actually dead one does not come back from that (that’s the NDE).

Death is irreversible.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It is though. It is very definitely a fringe opinion.

You see if a NDE occurs one is not actually dead so it does not count as we cannot rule out hallucinations.

If one is actually dead one does not come back from that (that’s the NDE).

Death is irreversible.

I was going to say: Near Death is not dead. Dead is a very permanent and binary state.

 

[Mountainmike]

I was going to say: Near Death is not dead. Dead is a very permanent and binary state.

If you read the book you would know that death is neither binary nor arguably permanent In the opinion of medical research and present emergency medicine .

Study it then comment, is a good order.

Even the group of Best known NDE researchers, many of whom are senior and well published cardiologists, accept that it is hard to find a form of words to describe the events . There is a debate in the books. So NDE is the best we have . It is valid in the sense that in the cardiac cases , without intervention they would have died eventually irrecoverably .
All of the leading researchers accept these are real experiences and consciousness is not just a process of the brain. If consciousness lives on , There is no death for the self. Only the body, eventually.

It is now a nightmare to decide when is safe to harvest organs.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

If you read the book you would know that death is neither binary nor arguably permanent In the opinion of medical research and present emergency medicine .

Study it then comment, is a good order,

Even the group of Best known researchersmany of whom are senior and well published cardiologists accept that it is hard to find a form of words to describe the events . So NDE is the best we have . It is valid in the sense that in the cardiac cases without intervention they would’ have died irrecoverably . They all accept they are real and consciousness is not just a pricess of the brain. If consciousness lives on There is no death for the self.

It is now a nightmare to decide when is safe to harvest organs.

Who is this "group of Best known researchersmany of whom are senior and well published cardiologists"? Don't just blithely mention them in such a way. Give us the names. And, no, don't tell us to "do the research ourselves!". You made the claim, you provide the names.

And no, it's really not a nightmare to decide when it is safe to harvest organs. You just made that up.

 

[Mountainmike]

Who is this "group of Best known researchersmany of whom are senior and well published cardiologists"? Don't just blithely mention them in such a way. Give us the names. And, no, don't tell us to "do the research ourselves!". You made the claim, you provide the names.

And no, it's really not a nightmare to decide when it is safe to harvest organs. You just made that up.

Not for you perhaps , it is for the ED doctors and Relatives wondering when to turn machines off, knowing what we know now. You let your assumptions replace facts.

What is the point in more names warden?

You won’t read the ones i first gave you, researchers like van lommel.

You reel off trite nonsense like “ death is binary” in direct contradiction of parnias book showing research that states it is anything but, and that the very definition of death is a problem, since many come back after clinical death! He should know , he is an ED doctor and published researcher.

If you don’t know ( for example) the name of the cardiologist with the biggest data set on NDE( thousands ) , or the name of the first cardiologist to do a proper scientific study on them , you dont know enough to comment on NDE.

What I dont understand is your lack of interest in the biggest question There Is.
What IS life, so what IS death, what IS self ?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Not for you perhaps , it is for the ED doctors and Relatives wondering when to turn machines off, knowing what we know now. You let your assumptions replace facts.

What is the point in more names warden?

You won’t read the ones i first gave you, researchers like van lommel.

You reel off trite nonsense like “ death is binary” in direct contradiction of parnias book showing research that states it is anything but, and that the very definition of death is a problem, since many come back after clinical death! He should know , he is an ED doctor and published researcher.

If you don’t know ( for example) the name of the cardiologist with the biggest data set on NDE( thousands ) , or the name of the first cardiologist to do a proper scientific study on them , you dont know enough to comment on NDE.

What I dont understand is your lack of interest in the biggest question There Is.
What IS life, so what IS death, what IS self ?

Just because you treat Parnia as the gospel, which is a VERY bad way to do science, does not mean I or others have to consider what he says as anything worth accepting. Hence why I and others keep asking for the names of these people you consider worth dropping so blithely.

I accept the claim that people have Near Death Experiences as well as Out of Body Experiences, because that's all they are: claims. Until you can find an actual mechanism behind it all and fully record said NDE/OoBE occurring, that's all I'll consider them to be.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I was not building a case on the laureates , I was simply noting that the idea that the consciousness is not just a process of the brain , has been a consistent theme and conclusion amongst researchers across a variety of disciplines for a century, for many reasons not just one. Also that the researchers involved are not quacks.

No one ever provides a mechanism for how such a non-cranial consciousness would function. Why should I give that the time of day? That is why I won't discuss it. I don't need the infinite loops.

Your comments on NDE are very illinformed.

But since you cannot conduct a civil discussion on science of death, get off my thread.

Death is the state that once you have achieved it, you can't go back. There is a definition for you.

 

[Mountainmike]

Just because you treat Parnia as the gospel,

I don’t

His review of state of the art practice and research in death and Ed medicine , is the state of the art.
if you could read , you would know where it’s at Too: which your remarks show you dont.

 

[SelfSim]

What IS life, so what IS death, what IS self ?

Phase transitions.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I don’t

His review of state of the art practice and research in death and Ed medicine , is the state of the art.
if you could read , you would know where it’s at Too: which your remarks show you dont.

Oh you very much are treating Parnia as the gospel here.

But as I said: until he or others discovers the mechanism for Out of Body Experiences, then I'll consider it nothing more than claims. That's all it is to me.

And with that, I wash my hands of this farce.

 

[SelfSim]

Interesting fairly well-balanced article (below), which covers most of what has been discussed here. It cites the various studies/opinions and authors including Parnia and Von Lommel:

The new science of death: ‘There’s something happening in the brain that makes no sense’, The Guardian April 2024, By Alex Blasdel.

New research into the dying brain suggests the line between life and death may be less distinct than previously thought ..

Its well worth the read .. well better at least than going aound and around in @Mountainmike's circles and than his not-so-well-concealed agenda.
(Even his viewpoints are likely to be covered in this article).

 

[Mountainmike]

Interesting fairly well-balanced article (below), which covers most of what has been discussed here. It cites the various studies/opinions and authors including Parnia and Von Lommel:

The new science of death: ‘There’s something happening in the brain that makes no sense’, The Guardian April 2024, By Alex Blasdel.

Its well worth the read .. well better at least than going aound and around in @Mountainmike's circles and than his not-so-well-concealed agenda.
(Even his viewpoints are likely to be covered in this article).

The guardian ? you choose a newspaper ? Seriously @SelfSim ?
Blasdel is a joyrnalist and is neither medic , researcher, nor academic

The guardian has scant connection with reality at the best of times, and always has an agenda.
I would be pilloried if I referred to it , Or him, and you know it!

Van lommel is a researcher and cardiologist. Who did one of the best structured longitudinal tests ever on NDE.
Van lommels study and conclusions were published in peer reviewed medical journal lancet , try reading that instead!

Van lommels book and parnias have bibliographies spanning the subject and hundreds of papers and reviews.
( including sherrington and Eccles) There are hundreds of papers and summaries in a variety of respected medical journals. The hypothesis that the brain produces consciousness is an unproven assumption. Increasing evidence disputes it.

Borjigin researched how many.? Whilst I don’t dispute what he says nor can I confirm. He just isnt one of the big names featured in the guardian.
Jeffrey long cardiologist and researcher had thousands of systematic patient histories analyzed statistically.


Van lommel did longitudinal studies that compared NDE vs non NDE from many hospitals so is able to compare the two groups. So ruling out anoxia, belief , hallucination, drugs, race, gender etc. Thats real peer reviewed science.


I prefer science to cherry picking journalists, so I cant be bothered to read it!