Scientific Theories
of the Near-Death Experience
The
following are excerpts from Jean Ritchie's excellent
book
Death's Door which is unfortunately out-of-print.
Here she describes all the various theories explaining
the near-death experience. It is important to realize
the fact that although the mechanism for the dying
process in the brain can be quantified, this by
no means proves that NDEs are merely a vision produced
by the brain which ends upon permanent brain death.
Science is unable to prove this because of the
large
amount of circumstantial evidence that consciousness
can exist far removed from the body. In the same
vein, science cannot prove that consciousness can
survive death; however, research is underway right
now that may provide scientific evidence that consciousness
can exist outside of the body. Many people, such
as myself, believe it is only a matter of time.
NDE researchers do not have to prove anything. The
circumstantial evidence is in their favor. But science
has a lot of explaining to do if tries to claim
that consciousness does not survive death.
A good analogy
of one current theory of consciousness assumes that
consciousness is not localized in the skull. Assuming
consciousness is like a television signal that exists
in the air waves and is being processed by a television
set (the brain) to produce images on the screen
(brain chemistry) representing a television program
(a near-death experience). Using this analogy, current
scientific theories claim that the near-death experience
is a product of the television set. In other words,
the television program is a product of the television
set. Using the analogy, this would be false because
it is the television signal working with the television
that produces the television program. Some scientific
claims state that death is the end of consciousness
- like shutting of the television set is the end
of the television signal in the air waves. Using
this analogy, you can see that such a statement
is false. Shutting off the television does not affect
the television signal in the air waves. Some of
the top consciousness researchers believe this analogy
fits, that is, consciousness is like the television
signals in the air waves and that death is not the
end of consciousness. Shutting off the television
set does not affect the signal in the air waves.
The following
are the scientific theories concerning the phenomenon
of the near-death experience.
|
|
Table
of Contents |
|
Return to Top |
1.
The Dying Brain Theory |
|
This
theory is one that has been popularized by
Dr., Susan Blackmore in her book Dying To Live.
One of the greatest strengths of the afterlife theory
and the argument that NDEs are real is also one
of its greatest weaknesses. The fact that all those
who had NDEs follow the same path toward the light,
going through similar stages on the way, makes a
powerful case for the whole thing being a profound
spiritual journey to an afterlife where everyone,
from all ages and cultures, is welcome. But that
same case, the "sameness" evidence,
is also a fundamental part of the argument that
NDEs are not real experiences, not spiritual voyages,
but a function of the dying brain. All brains, regardless
of where in the world they come from, die in the
same way, say the skeptics. And that is why all
NDEs have essential core elements which are the
same. It is not because the dying person is traveling
toward a beautiful afterlife, but because the neurotransmitters
in the brain are shutting down and creating the
same lovely illusions for all who are near-death.
But why?
Why should the dying brain do this, if it is just
a highly sophisticated lump of tissue? That question
is one of the most fundamental questions in the
whole of human thinking. It boils down to asking,
are we individuals with "personalities"
and "souls" and "minds" that
are exclusive to us? Or are we simply bodies controlled
by very clever computers, or brains, each of which
works a little differently from the rest, thus making
each of us unique, just as an Apple computer is
different from an IBM, although there are far more
similarities between them than there are differences?
Scientists
and researchers are divided. There are some who
want to reduce NDEs to nothing more than a series
of brain reactions. Others, who accept the realness
and validity of NDEs, are nonetheless quite happy
to see it put into a scientific context. In other
words, they are not frightened of researching the
experience rigorously, of finding out everything
that we possibly can about it, perhaps even being
able to explain aspects of it. But they can happily
let that scientific aspect sit alongside the deeply
personal, life-enhancing evidence of those who have
actually been there.
There are
very few people around, even among the skeptics,
who would deny that people have NDEs, and that they
are deeply affected by them because so many obviously
sane and well-balanced people have now come forward
and talked about what happened to them. What they
do dispute is what causes an NDE and what it means.
There are two main strands of research: one takes
the psychological approach, which looks for reasons
for human beings to behave the way they do, and
to think and possibly to hallucinate the way they
do. The other is the straightforward physiological
approach, which is searching for that part of the
brain which malfunctions and causes an NDE. Increasingly,
as in all brain research, not just that connected
with NDEs, the two approaches overlap.
The ruthless,
depersonalized argument - that an NDE is just the
result of the brain beginning to die - is not
acceptable to the vast majority of people who had
an NDE. To reduce what was a profound and transforming
experience to nothing more than a set of neurotransmitters
going on the blink is a bit like seeing Michelangelo's
statue of David as nothing more than several tons
of marble.
If there
is no afterlife, and NDEs are just the last throw
of a fevered and dying brain, why does it bother?
If everything, including the soul and personality,
is going to dust and ashes, why does the brain lay
on this last wonderful floor show for people near-death,
or facing actual death, who relax into peacefulness
and describe their wonderful visions?
If NDEs are
just a hallucination, why do a great many people
report being told, "Your mission has not been
completed," or, "The time for your death
is not yet," during their NDE? If NDEs are
just hallucinations, how can so many people be told
the same thing in their hallucinations? Isn't it
odd that so many people are being told the same
thing? Are they all hallucinating identical
responses? For many people, it is easier to believe
that NDEs are a real afterlife experience and not
mass hallucination.
In my NDE
Article Directory I have
an excellent rebuttal of Susan Blackmore's theory.
|
Return to top
|
2.
Charles Darwin's Theory |
|
One
theory is that it is a deliberate ploy of the human
race to help those behind adapt better to the inevitable
ending of their lives. Darwin's
simple theory of the survival of the fittest
holds that every species is struggling to increase
its hold on this planet and guarantee the survival
of its descendants. That is our greatest primary
urge. Other animals help their peers to survive: the
dying elephant, for example, trails away into the
bush so that he does not slow down the herd. Are
the dying just "helping the herd"
by putting out propaganda that death does not contain
a sting? But this theory does not explain why NDEs
are erratic, or why we shunted down an evolutionary
sidetrack for years by making them something that
people were reluctant to talk about. After all,
in Darwinian terms, humans are the most highly evolved
intellectual life forms on Earth.
|
Return to top
|
3.
The Hallucination Theory |
|
Some
scientists from the camp that believes that NDEs
are one day going to be explained by brain functions
have suggested that the dying secrete endorphins,
hormones which act on the central nervous system
to suppress pain and which are known to create the "runner's
high", which happens when long-distance
runners go through a pain barrier and find themselves
running with ease and without tiredness, and with
a feeling of elation. But endorphins are not hallucinogens
and cannot re-create a state similar to NDEs, so
although they may be involved in the process as
a painkiller, they are not responsible for the whole
experience.
Research
on neurotransmitter receptors is highly complex
and, in terms of our understanding of the functioning
of the brain, in its infancy. It is known that a
powerful anesthetic called
ketamine can produce many of the features of
an NDE, particularly the out-of-body element, and
one theory is that a ketamine-like substance may
be released by the body at the time of an NDE, and
may attach itself to certain neurotransmitter receptors
and be responsible for producing the whole NDE by
blocking those receptors.
A psychology
professor named
Dr. Ronald Siegel from UCLA rejects the spiritual
and mystical importance of NDEs. He claims to have
reproduced NDEs in his laboratory by giving LSD
to volunteers, but, other researchers say that although
drug-induced hallucinations may have some resemblance
to NDEs, they are not the same. For one thing, drug
induced hallucinations often evoke fearful and paranoid
experiences which are not generally found in NDEs.
Drug induced hallucinations distort reality while
NDEs have been described as "hyper-reality."
|
Return to top
|
4.
The Temporal Lobe Theory |
|
Some
features of the NDE are known to occur in a type
of
epilepsy associated with damage to the temporal
lobe of the brain, and researchers have found
that by electrically stimulating this lobe they
can mimic some elements of NDEs, such as leaving
oneself behind, and the sense of life memories flashing
past, although this is actually a common feature
of NDEs. They believe that the stress of being near-death,
or thinking that you are near-death, may in some
way cause the stimulation of this lobe. There is
some evidence to support this theory in the lower
numbers of NDEs reported by people who suffer strokes
which affect this part of the brain, or have tumors
in this area. But there is also a case against:
the characteristic emotions that result from temporal
lobe stimulation are fear, sadness, and loneliness,
not the calm and love of an NDE. Also, scientists
may be simply discovering the mechanism connected
with the mind/body separation thought by some to
occur at death. Because a chemical mechanism is
present in the brain, this does not mea NDEs are
strictly chemical reactions. Science may only be
describing the aspect of dying that deals with the
brain.
|
Return to top
|
5.
The Lack of Oxygen Theory |
|
Other
possible explanations are a
lack of oxygen in the brain, or too much carbon
dioxide. But these would not explain why some patients
are able to give full and cogent reports of things
that went on around them during their NDE. Cardiologist
Dr. Michael Sabom has reported one patient who,
while having an NDE, watched his doctor perform
a blood test that revealed both high oxygen and
low carbon dioxide. Comparisons between NDEs and
hallucinations produced by an oxygen-starved brain
show that the latter are chaotic and much more similar
to
psychotic hallucinations. Confusion, disorientation,
and fear are the typical characteristics, compared
with the tranquility, calm, and sense of order of
an NDE. There are some features in common: a
sense of well-being and power, and themes of death
and dying. But people who have experienced both
at different times say that there is an unmistakable
difference.
Hallucinations,
whether deliberately drug-induced, the result of
medication, or caused by oxygen deprivation, almost
always take place while the subject is awake and
conscious, whereas NDEs happen during unconsciousness,
sometimes when the subject is so close to death
that no record of brain activity is recorded on
an electroencephalograph, the machine that monitors
brain waves. Also, the medical conditions that take
subjects to the brink of death, and to having an
NDE, do not necessarily include oxygen-deprivation,
or any medication. This is particularly true of
accident victims. NDEs appear to occur at the moment
when the threat of death occurs, not necessarily
at the time, maybe hours later, when death is close
enough to be starving the brain of oxygen.
|
Return to top
|
6.
The Depersonalization Theory |
|
The
first modern attempt to explain NDEs in psychological
terms was made in 1930 by a psychologist who argued
that people faced with an unpleasant reality of
death and illness attempt to replace it with pleasurable
fantasies to protect themselves. They "depersonalize,"
removing themselves from themselves - the
floating away from their own bodies that experiencers
report having. It is a theory that is still sometimes
put forward, but it can be countered by the fact
that some typical features of an NDE just do not
fit into the
depersonalization mode, such as the strong spiritual
and mystical feelings, and the increased alertness
and awareness.
|
Return to top
|
7.
The Memory of Birth Theory |
|
Another
popular theory is that NDEs have nothing to do with
death at all, but are
memories of birth. A baby being born leaves
the womb to travel down a tunnel towards a light,
and what waits for it in the light is usually a
great deal of love and warmth. What happens at the
point of death is only a stored memory of what happened
when life began. Yet again there are a lot of points
that don't match: a baby being born does not exactly
float at high speed down a tunnel, but is buffeted
along with difficulty by its mother's contractions.
And how does this model explain the meeting with
friends and relatives who have died? The "Being
of Light" is supposed to be the midwife or
the doctor who rules the delivery room - but many
babies are born without a midwife or doctor present,
or perhaps with many people present. On a purely
practical level, a baby's nervous system is not
sufficiently developed to allow it to assimilate
and store memories of the birth process.
Those who
argue this theory say that the feelings of peace
and bliss are a memory of the peace of the womb
when all physical needs were met by the mother and
there were no stresses and strains. Why should this
be any more likely than the feelings of peace and
bliss are relief from the pain of illness and injury
at the point of death? However, being born
is often not a pleasant experience for babies which
leaves them crying as if in agony. In contrast,
NDEs are more often described as the most pleasurable
experience a person can have. The birth process
is not pleasant.
|
Return to top
|
8.
The Afterlife Hypothesis |
|
This website has a web page
with a long list of
scientific
evidence supporting the Afterlife Hypothesis.
Dr. Melvin Morse, who did all the ground-breaking
research with young children, states unequivocally:
|
|
Dr. Kenneth Ring, one of the most respected
near-death researchers who has done much work of
putting the subject of NDEs on the academic map,
has this to say about the afterlife theory:
|
"Any
adequate neurological explanation would
have to be capable of showing how the
entire complex of phenomena associated
with the core experience [that
is, the out-of-body state, paranormal
knowledge, the tunnel, the golden light,
the voice or presence, the appearance
of deceased relatives, beautiful vistas,
and so forth] would be expected to occur
in subjectively authentic fashion as
a consequence of specific neurological
events triggered by the approach of
death ... I am tempted to argue that
the burden of proof has now shifted
to those who wish to explain NDEs in
this way." (Dr.
Kenneth Ring)
|
|
Those sentences
are a couple of complicated sentences, but what
Ken Ring is saying is that there are so many consistent
features of NDEs that it is going to be very difficult
to find a good explanation for them in terms of
the physical working of the brain. And, he believes,
that the evidence is so strong for them that sympathetic
researchers should no longer feel that the burden
is on to them to prove that they happen, but rather,
for the skeptics to prove that they don't.
Perhaps the
final word should go to
Nancy Evans Bush, an experiencer with the
International Association for Near-Death Studies,
who said:
|
"There
is no human experience of any description
that can't simply be reduced to a biological
process, but that in no way offsets
the meaning those experiences have for
us - whether it's falling
in love, or grieving, or having a baby." Or
coming close to death and having a transcendental
experience. (Nancy
Evans Bush)
|
|
There is a "mountain" of
scientific evidence suggesting consciousness can
survive bodily death. Some of this evidence has
been verified through NDEs involving "veridical
perception." Some of the evidence is spontaneous
and circumstantial and of the kind that would stand
up in a court of law. Some researchers have pointed
out how science has not even been able to quantify
consciousness, let alone trying to quantify the
NDE. Scientists certainly lack the necessary tools
to fully quantify and understand the nature of consciousness.
The problem facing scientists in this matter is
how consciousness can arise from a lump of goo (the
brain) or how a conglomeration of atoms and molecules
can produce the mind. Perhaps someday when science
has discovered the true nature of consciousness,
we may then be on the road to finding conclusive
scientific evidence of an afterlife.
|
Return to top |
|
|