[quote pid='1823364' dateline='1538387546']
1)You start from a position that a body-brain is necessary to establish an interaction with the consciousness.
2)There is no need for that.
3)Thousand of NDEs already demonstrated that you are YOU no matter what.
4)In fact without a body-brain you are much much better.
5)It is like when you get out your car after being stuck inside for a lifetime.
6)That is what freedom is all about PT.
1) No, I see/experience nothing BUT bodies with brains.
If you see differently, please point out said different things.
2) You keep making that assertion. We (I) keep asking you to demonstrate it.
3)Again, as I pointed out. ALL the people you are referenceing are (A) Still alive. Both before and after the experiance.(B)How can some one verify the 'Insubstancial' at the time of said person, effectivly, "Being nothing more than conciousness"?(Supposedly)©Millions of anecdotal comments still do not make anything true.
How does one independantly and empircally test such things?
4)Another assertion. Please, as asked multiple times, provide some evidence/.proof.
5)Your car analogy is not working. It is a poor analogy. Heck, it's down right pining for the fjords at this point.
6)Sorry. I do not parse this comment in relation to our discussion.
Much cheers.
Not at work.
[/quote]
1)You start from a position that a body-brain is necessary to establish an interaction with the consciousness.
2)There is no need for that.
3)Thousand of NDEs already demonstrated that you are YOU no matter what.
4)In fact without a body-brain you are much much better.
5)It is like when you get out your car after being stuck inside for a lifetime.
6)That is what freedom is all about PT.
1) No, I see/experience nothing BUT bodies with brains.
If you see differently, please point out said different things.
2) You keep making that assertion. We (I) keep asking you to demonstrate it.
3)Again, as I pointed out. ALL the people you are referenceing are (A) Still alive. Both before and after the experiance.(B)How can some one verify the 'Insubstancial' at the time of said person, effectivly, "Being nothing more than conciousness"?(Supposedly)©Millions of anecdotal comments still do not make anything true.
How does one independantly and empircally test such things?
4)Another assertion. Please, as asked multiple times, provide some evidence/.proof.
5)Your car analogy is not working. It is a poor analogy. Heck, it's down right pining for the fjords at this point.
6)Sorry. I do not parse this comment in relation to our discussion.
Much cheers.
Not at work.
[/quote]
