Aren't you just projecting/prescribing another worldview on others here? I'm not sure what you'd call it, but it seems like just another "ism". You cite "evidence driven" here but what evidence and does said evidence speak definitively?
The evidence I cite is compiled from the experience and reports of NDErs from all cultures, channeled info, OBErs, mediums, studies of reincarnation, quantum physics and maybe even the psi research and consciousness studies. There is such a thing of an objective study of these things, though it isn’t talked about on this site really. But there are brilliant people who compile all of this stuff and try to make sense of it. And it all marries together suprisingly well. Generally.
That doesn’t mean that there isn’t tons of disagreements. But there are some basic tenets we can take from this data. I could maybe list 10 of them. This is not even remotely representative of all reality and (in the long run) we ultimately do not really understand what’s going on at the base of it all. It seems we can conclude the following from all of this data
1) Consciousness seems to be fundemental in some way, if not completely fundamental
2) We are eternal consciousness
3) After death, there’s probably an infinite number of states of potential being, some physical, some non physical, some even come back to earth. Many end up in what seems to be an earth like environment. The spiritualists if the 1800s refered to this as “the summerland.” More recently researchers and astral travelers refer to this as “astral earth” or simple as one of the astral planes. If you spend some time on Reddit’s astral travel and OBE forums, you’ll see what I mean. This place SEEMS to be populated by many deceased people. This comes up in NDEs as well. And some good channeled information and mediums also mention these earth like realms.
4) Family members, friends, and even pets seemed cosmically tied through loving bonds, and seem to remain (much of the time) linked together after physical death on earth
5) There’s no such thing as being put at a disadvantage after death due to religious beliefs beliefs. Meaning you’re not going to hell for believing a certain thing. What matters and what may determine afterlife state, is your state of mind and how you treated others. This is largely due to how much more thought responsive some of these other environments seem.
6) Love seems to be a cosmically powerful force
7) Were all connected. What we do to another, we do to ourselves, what we do to ourselves, we do to each other.
8) people continue on after death as themselves and their personality remains
9) we can sometimes communicate with these people through consciousness, with varying degrees of success and accuracy
10) We are multidimensional, and might be doing several things simultaneously that we are not aware of
This is off the top of my head.
I could be largely or entirely wrong about some of these. But, frankly that’s what keeps popping up over and over again through these studies. I’m talking about taking all of the studies and viewing them as a whole. If things come up which start to contradict this, I’ll gladly and enthusiastically change my views. That’s a little different than planting ones flag and stating “I believe that Noah pushed 10,000 animals onto a boat and saved them as the world flooded, because somebody wrote it down 5,000 years ago and that’s what my parents and parts of my culture believe and I don’t care
What you say”
If one sets aside world views and biases, and reads hundreds of NDEs, hundreds of experiences of OBErs, (guys like Ziewe, Buhlman, Bob Monroe, and Yogananda, to take an easterner), reincarnation research, dig into what a lot of good mediums (many of them tested and accredited by researchers like Julie Beischel) tell us, and see how this all marries in with consciousness studies and how often interlinks and confirming information comes up between the studies, a blurry picture emerges. Blurry but usually strikingly consistent.
There are several good books by different authors who attempt to compile some of this information and see how it all marries together. I generally know them by their fruit. What I like about them is that they don’t claim to be spiritual gurus or authorities. Just researchers. And they are generally happy to listen to anybody they can and compile their experiences and see what inter links and commonalities they share with all the other experiences and information. The widely parroted idea that “all thoughts and ideas Concerning this topic carry equal weight and we’ll lump religions in with this and that they all constitute an ism and cannot be distinguished from each other” is nonsensical. That doesn’t mean that my view is correct. But, that could be all wrong in some way we don’t understand and could be amended in the future. I doubt you’ll see religious leaders ready to amend and change their religious dogmas as new information keeps rolling in.
Some sources I’d recommend looking into include Dr Craig Hogan, the lawyer Victor Zammit, OBErs Jurgen Ziewe, William Buhlman, Ian Lawton. They’re imperfect and they do have their biases. But their attempts to be objective in their rearsearch is admirable.
Apologies for poor grammar and spelling. I wrote this on the go. I also apologize because I feel like I’ve mentioned all of this like 10 times the past few months on this site and I want to stop doing it. Maybe I’ll make a thread on it. But I did want to respond here and explain myself .