I would just be guessing, but it does seem to be the case that whatever we experience contributes to learning on some level. We can see this when people have life reviews during their NDE. They are never judged, but only asked what did you learn? — Sam26
Even if I couldn't ultimately be harmed why would I choose to go through hell without not much to learn from it? — litewave
Perhaps, instead of 'suppressing memory', it's more of a provision where by you can only remember certain things if you attain certain degree of experience. For example, with our humanity being largely primitive 'emotionally' and even 'mentally', imagine what someone like hitler would do if he realized in present times of his atrocities back then? Probably suicide or worse become unhinged and go on another killing-spree. Therefore, like Yogis, I think we unlock as much of our memories as we can handle. — BrianW
Remember, I'm telling you what the evidence is telling us, that doesn't mean that I have all the answers. I know I don't. Moreover, because you can't make sense of it doesn't mean much, unless of course there's an obvious contradiction. — Sam26
From what I've learned from esoteric studies, the progression as we evolve from our initial, through our transitory and to the final phase of life cannot have a regression. There may be delays but never regression. — BrianW
The teaching goes something like:
Initially, we are like 'electrons' in the 'sun'. We have the warmth and light (love and wisdom) of the 'sun' but we are solely dependent on it. That is, by ourselves, say the 'electrons' are hurled through space, the warmth and light would diminish gradually. Therefore, our evolution is the process by which we learn to become 'suns' and have the capacity to give warmth and heat of our own volition and nature.
Does this make any sense? — BrianW
The basis for the conclusion is the testimonial evidence of those who have had an NDE ... — Sam26
Then you probably mean something else than Western esoteric traditions — litewave
First, a high number of testimonials gives a better picture of the events in question. So the greater the number the more likely we are to get an accurate report, but not necessarily, i.e., high numbers don't always translate into accurate testimonial evidence, which is why one must also consider other important factors. — Sam26
Second, seeing the event from a variety of perspectives will also help to clear up some of the testimonial reports. For example, different cultural perspectives, different age groups, different historical perspectives, different religious perspectives, different times of the day, and even considering people with different physical impairments (like the blind) will help clear up some of the biased and misremembered reports. — Sam26
Third, is the consistency of the reports, i.e., are there a large number of consistent or inconsistent reports. While it is important to have consistency in the testimonial evidence, inconsistency doesn't necessarily negate all of the reports. When dealing with a large number of testimonials you will almost certainly have contradictory statements, this happens even when people report on everyday events. Thus, one must weed out the testimony that does not fit the overall picture, and paint a picture based on what the majority of accounts are testifying to. It doesn't necessarily mean that what the minority is saying is unimportant, only that accuracy tends to favor what the majority are reporting. — Sam26
Fourth, can the testimony be corroborated by any other objective means, thereby strengthening the testimonial evidence as given by those who make the claims. — Sam26
Fifth, are the testimonials firsthand accounts, as opposed to being hearsay. In other words, is the testimonial evidence given by the person making the claim, and not by someone simply relating a story they heard from someone else. This is very important in terms of the strength of the testimonials. — Sam26
Each of these five criteria serve to strengthen the testimonial evidence. All of these work hand-in-hand to strengthen a particular testimonial conclusion, and they serve to strengthen any claim to knowledge. If we have a large enough pool of evidence based on these five criteria we can say with confidence that the conclusion follows. In other words, we can say what is probably the case, not what is necessarily the case. — Sam26
.There's no solid evidence for consciousness surviving death. There's no solid evidence that it doesn't.
.However, given what we know about everything else in nature and the universe and psychology, we can argue that there's a very strong inductive argument against the consciousness surviving without the body.
.Therefor, we are like animals and animals consciousness should therefor also continue after their death. Animal tests on this does not show any data that support that this is the case.
.We humans also have a tendency to be biased to what comforts us. Most of us have had deaths around us in our life and it's easier for us to cope if we believe that our friends and family are in a better place. However, this is a false comfort based on our need to overcome grief and cannot be used in an argument for the survival of the mind after death. We don't know if it's true, but we want it to be true and the "want" is so great that even the most intellectual mind can be teased into believing in an afterlife. This is probably why there are so many scientists that still believes in some religion, even though they are trained to view big questions with the scientific method.
.…Until one day, the drive fails, the processor fails, the power fails, and the life it had is dead, all data gone, corrupted, corroded. Others cannot access it, it's gone, but some of the data was uploaded, some information got saved to the network and others can gather around this info and use it going forward. But the drive will never work again, it is gone and that's that.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.