I would debate some of this. I'd consider an NDE, in some instances, a de-compartmentalization from that which is entirely local ie. inside the mind, to something that is, at the very least, perhaps in relationship with the beyond, whether that is valid or not we will never know, unless God or angels or whatever make themselves available physically (doubtful), because all that we can see, know is, in fact consciousness itself, happening based on our current understanding of the dimensions we can comprehend, presently, while we are alive.

Empirically, I agree, an NDE does not confirm, nor could it ever, that there is some type of concurrent common experience we can point to that suggests an afterlife exists. It's difficult to decouple the whole I saw a tunnel and bright light at the end of it, felt warm, because of either when that story might have been told to that person, or their desire to experience something like it.

Also, I mean that whole story itself in particular makes sense. Logically, it's a way to consider access to something that so many, both conscious religious folk and antagonists or religion (likely more subsciously) and death is quite frankly the ultimate peace, so I am not surprised one would either approach their potential goodbye in relative solemnity and sense comfort in a tunnel, only to turn away from it.

The human mind is the most complex thing on this planet and we are constantly engineering circumstances. And the circumstance of a tunnel and bright light at the end of it is a metaphor we're associating with from a very early age.

What I would however say is while our thoughts are occurring on an electro-chemical level, the neurons that are firing in this state, might be in unique arrangements that bridge a kind of consciousness gap more easily, thus very much in relation to the nature of a potential other reality. The Quantum Mind is surely an interesting proposition - and one that will continue to get explored - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind#:~:text=The%20quantum%20mind%20or%20quantum,function%20and%20could%20explain%20consciousness . - though it is littered with problems that Dennett in particular has addressed very well.

What I would rather say is based on an essential, earlier mentioned premise. We ARE consciousness. That's it. And consciousness is more than that which is in our mind. We are in relation to consciousness endlessly, physical or not, by the simple act of existing and recognizing consciousness itself exists.

NDE's commonality provide instead only an insight that there is a thread of sensory experience in the mind, and the potentiality for us to reach out something that feels beyond it.

It's the potential for a relationship, and validation within NDE experiencers that makes them aspire for new choices in their reality when they turn back, which is the key, rather than the definition that it is empirically true.

The theory of chance would beg the differ here, particularly if you are implying that aliens don't exist given the scale of the Universe.

As a single data point to provide perspective and scale - 'The Hubble Deep Field, an extremely long exposure of a relatively empty part of the sky, provided evidence that there are about 125 billion (1.25×1011) galaxies in the observable universe.'

How can you contend that life is a one-off event if we are speaking towards that number for GALAXIES, let alone stars? Interestingly, the Milky Way is among one of the oldest galaxies. By way of comparison, the Milky Way galaxy that contains our solar system is approximately 13.2 billion years old, while the universe itself has been dated at 13.8 billion years. So we are on the older side, per say.

But for further perspective, within our galaxy, our own planetary system is the only one officially called “solar system,” but astronomers have discovered more than 3,200 other stars with planets orbiting them in our galaxy.

To consider life a one off event simply defies the probability of the odds. If you keep rolling a die, with 5.4 billion sides to it, an infinite number of times, at the pace of even once per second (a joke given how chemical reactions occur at scale), to ascertain, that whether in a system with the right chemical compositions, given we already know exist from foundational chemistry, it will eventually turn up with the side that says - Life: Begin.

We just may not ever find it in existence somewhere else, reachable, to be true.

Unless we can eventually harness dark / exotic matter or create wormholes, or send a signal back from going through the event horizon of a black hole (and it actually leads somewhere, not just crushing us), or discover a way to travel faster than the speed of light, leveraging likely some type of quantum mechanics principle like quantum entanglement, the reality is we may never know because of the vast distances we are from other potential life harbouring planets, because of the vast distances in light years we are from them. Or we learn to access higher dimensions of reality that transcend physical matter - I'd vote for this if we keep evolving the right way, don't put chips in our head, and accept mortality. Or finally, if aliens actually do show up.

If we ever do, physically, it will surely be an exciting day, but there is no question in my mind that it does. We are as special and as not as we let ourselves believe, depending on perspective, and particularly Darwinian evolution in all that came, or was perhaps somewhat destined to, come next!

Theory on the nature of War - by relation to the necessity for opposition (related but not exclusive to Putin / Russia's waged War against Ukraine)

A truth I have come to believe is that the quest for meeting one's ambition, will be strengthened by the toil one put towards it, but everything needs opposition to propel it. Without it, one sort of has no rudder.

To pin oneself, in a certain context of the mind, against an idea, person, place, or thing, perhaps the entire world itself, is to spend time in the headspace that fuels a certain kind of ambition which more frequently designs is own perspectives greatness.

For if a worthy opponent, you will come to see both their weaknesses and strengths and then move with choice towards or away from what those are, letting it guide your capacity for the duration of time that the opposing force remains a focus, and get external clarity for what those ambitions truly are.

The next piece here can be ordered as such:

1) The considered heights and the reality of your current relation to them
2) The nature of your opposition- is it intrinsically good or bad? What are the layers to its goodness vs.
3) What are you willing to risk or sacrifice to compete with it? Put another way, how much must you test the system?
4) At what cost?
5) What will be the achievement?

The ultimate goal must be to make peace with it via discourse that ascertains new truths on both sides, at a later date, for why the opposition existed in the first place. To do so, will inevitably deepen insight and to not do so is to forego the entire point of why it existed in the first place.

And if the love that exists in the heart for both oneself and that opposition, for the war that opposition has battled as a result of its inherent nature, perhaps in mind alone, then it can be viewed as a worthy battle to have waged, by the degree to which it was initially just.

Consider a few examples:

-The Cold War and the concept of MAD (mutually assured destruction) and how it also paved a new path for peace. Also the ensuing space race.

-The rivalries of siblings - Venus and Serena. Peyton and Eli, or that within any family

The rivalries of artists - https://theculturetrip.com/europe/italy/articles/the-10-greatest-artistic-rivalries/?amp=1

The great rivalries of sports teams - Giants vs Dodgers. Packers vs Bears. Lakers vs Celtics. Others.

The rivalry of War, namely the Second World War and its accompanying ideologies, driving the West's fundamental value in freedom of thought

---

I am more interested to hear if this rationale is sound in broader contexts, rather than debate if it is true, in its entirety, in the case of the War in Ukraine. I put it here to spur broader discussion on the psyche of War, and how we contend with it.