Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by Alex, May 9, 2017.
I agree completely.
Absolutely, these experiences are often given a narrative that can be attractive or repelling, depending on your position...
...and I would say depending on your position, when compared to the group. Exceed the group norms and the experience might be repelling, receed from the group norms and the experience might be attractive. If the group is generally well balanced, the experience seems to repel or attract one towards the average, which tends to be a good thing.
I think of the group (all of us), as a organism... which might be thought of as a bit like a piece of rope... moving through spacetime.. trying to keep itself together.
We see the same preference towards average faces in babies at a very early age. Research shows that attractiveness is actually defined by a face’s similarity to the prototype created by finding the average of faces. Langlois & Roggman (1990) showed that a computer-generated face that was formed from several individual faces was judged to be significantly more attractive than any of the individual stimuli used to form that average. Once again, I think we see the organism trying to keep itself together.
But it does seem necessary for there to be individuals on the outside, as well as the inside.
I was thinking of something a bit simpler really. For example my friend and his sister had lunch in a cafe. She found it dark and oppressive, he found it cosy and snug. I suspect it's something to do with underlying mood and mindset.
Here is what my husband said while dying.
“Where are the serrated knives with the brown handles?”
“The sun is going into the shadows”.
“Tomorrow is the first day”.
Here is what I said:
"Why are you sitting there with your head in your hands,
grunting and coughing,
when you could be sleeping well in your own bed? "
“I’m cranking myself up”, he replied.
Perfect examples of what Raymond Moody talks about:
Stafford Betty discusses terminal lucidity with Jeff Mishlove. Some very interesting cases are touched on in this interview:
The case of "Käthe" is explored more fully in this paper from Michael Nahm and Bruce Greyson:
THE DEATH OF ANNA KATHARINA EHMER: A
CASE STUDY IN TERMINAL LUCIDITY
And skeptic Jesse Bering discusses a personal case of terminal lucidity in this article from Scientific American:
One Last Goodbye: The Strange Case of Terminal Lucidity
One thing repeated many times in the interview was an opinion on Raymond Moody which I share: that he has a deep and profound wisdom despite the fact that he plays with nonsense and has made a life's work of studying nonsense. He has a way of finding one's sacred cows and driving them off a cliff, but always repays you with something better.
The wise old sage archetype is always a capricious trickster: knowing perfectly how to walk the line between the serious and the silly - one moment drawing you in with elegantly simplistic metaphorical truths and aphorisms - the next moment breaking up the fearful seriousness with laughter. One moment building up intense suspense and interest, the next moment smashing your own sacred icons.
I think this sums up a mastery of consciousness and of the human experience: how to dance playfully on this line between order and chaos, sense and nonsense, seriously solid and magically metaphorical. Grasping tightly and letting go. Creating and destroying. Deeply caring and compassionate yet able to instantly let go of sorrow and become unapproachably aloof.
I really enjoyed this episode immensely!
I found Lisa Smartt, perhaps appropriately for her name, to be very intelligent & the approach she takes & the questions it raises extremely fascinating.....I searched online to see if there were any other podcasts or presentations from Lisa and unfortunately I could only find one or two podcasts, so special thanks for this episode and bringing Lisa's work to our attention Alex!
Here you have a whole bunch of them.>> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Lisa+Smartt
Hurm, as usual I enjoy your expressions and thoughts you post. And think you were the "dirty curve-breaker" in creative writing class. I take it you have read some of Ray's work with passion.
But, in my exposure in hearing Raymond Moody speak in person, my first impressions weren't quite as idealistic as yours. I thought his talk and presentment as pragmatic - as any scientist. He seemed more of an innocent and exposed his sincere struggles, as to how hard it is to get these ideas heard. Maybe it was the setting, but he came off much more "researcher" than writer.
Thank you Stephen. one day I hope to write... right now I'm just doing research for whatever it is I'm going to write.
Maybe I superimposed too strongly the capricious trickster archetype on my memories of Moody's talks. At any rate he strikes me as very playful and lighthearted while at the same time taking these deep subjects very seriously which I believe is the mark of a wise and well-matured old soul.
Separate names with a comma.