1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death.

interesting reading

Discussion in 'Member Introductions' started by William Pennat, Mar 30, 2019.

  1. Oh, yeah. New here but looking forward to these discussions. I read through what's basically a blog post some time ago. Does seem safe enough, since I didn't get any warnings either from Google or my own hyper-paranoid antimalware/antivirus protection. Kind of my hobby, surfing to find afterlife stuff, especially good books on the subject. I've also accumulated quite a collection of these, which I'm planning to share in the form of a bibliography (ultimately annotated) when I get the time.

    Anyway, just a couple of points here. The experimental evidence for psychic phenomena (psi for short) is overwhelming. Only the most close-minded skeptics (think CSICOP) reject it basically from a dogmatic perspective. (My karma just ran over their dogma!) My view on this is that psychic phenomena themselves are evidence of survival after death because they are evidence that, as the saying goes, "The mental is fundamental." That is, some form or other of philosophical idealism is the case. Moreover, it's also pretty clear to those of us who aren't dogmatic materialist that the mind is not the brain. (Pace, neurophysiology!) I'll be making these arguments here in much more detail as I go along.

    Additionally, though materialists are constantly claiming that "there is no evidence for survival" in fact, there is a ton of it. Read the literature. The evidence basically takes several forms -- apparitions, near-death experiences, communications with the dead (via reputable mediums and even directly) and many many well-documented reincarnation cases. And much of this evidence, I think, does stand up as science, if you look at the actual experimental literature by the British and American Societies for Psychical Research (SPR and ASPR), as well as other reputable (and, yes, scientific) sources.

    I've also had personal experiences that have helped convince me, such as my dead mother dropping in just to say "Hello" in my mind when I'm meditating in what was clearly her voice, not my own "mental voice". Again, be warned. More to come!
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2019
  2. mac

    mac Staff Member

    welcome to ALF :) It's good you're persuaded of survival but please remember you're largely preaching to the choir here. ALF is predicated on there being both abundant evidence of survival and a huge volume of trans-dimensional communications.
  3. Hi everyone. The afterlife has been a consuming interest of mine since childhood actually. I started my spiritual work as a fundie Christian and have since moved to a kind of universalist devotional practice and awareness. I consider myself well-enough trained academically to pursue the afterlife as a subject of serious inquiry, which is why I'm here. Looking forward --

  4. Thanks, Mac. I had that feeling, which is why I'm here. I do think I can provide some valuable I suppose you could call it "academic" support for believing in the afterlife. I tend to plump on the "objective evidence" side of the argument (as you can see from my post!) rather than simple "belief". And the evidence I find credible isn't just communications with the dead (though that too) but also a good deal of other (perhaps less "direct") evidence. As you can tell (again, from my post), I place a good deal of emphasis on the "scientific research" aspect, mainly, I think, because this where most of the doubting comes from.
  5. mac

    mac Staff Member

    Well, again, you're preaching to the choir as essentially scientific research isn't needed to be persuaded of what folk report and what's already known. Additionally past experience has shown such debate can be controversial and divisive but we'll see how things go. :)
  6. Mac -- Re your comment about "preaching to the choir" -- I don't think so. I'm seeing plenty of "skeptical" posts on some of the forums here. And people are right to be a bit skeptical. I don't think the question of whether there is an afterlife is something that can simply be taken on faith -- or even on the evidence of actual communication with the dead. We really do need to ensure that this is the kind of evidence it seems to be and this is where the research comes in. I certainly have had plenty of personal psychic experiences (including some interesting OBEs and lucid dreams) and that's probably convinced me as much or more than the extensive research I'm currently in the process of (which I agree has its limitations). Still and all....
  7. mac

    mac Staff Member

    Afterlife Forums' 'mission statement', the one visitors see at the head of all pages before signing up for an account, is: "Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death."

    When I say "preaching to the choir" it was meant in the sense of ALF's raison d'etre rather than literally to its members. Absolutely NO faith is expected from any of them about survival. Any member is entirely within her rights to hold doubts or be sceptical about any issue; BUT the operating premise for website owner Roberta and indeed myself as an ordinary member who happens to help with administration is that there is abundant evidence from all manner of sources about our survival beyond corporeal death.

    At best all the scientific research in the world will be unable to show anything different from what is already know by folk who have weighed the evidence and/or have researched themselves and/or have had personal experiences. But there is no expectation that anybody here should accept anything if it doesn't appeal to their reason. What isn't acceptable, however, are pages of pseudo-scientific debate which goes nowhere and may confuse and confound seekers desperate for help and support, perhaps after bereavement. And I repeat that past experience has shown such debate can be controversial and divisive.
  8. Mac -- thanks for you patience. After looking at more forum posts here, I can see what you mean. And I would agree that a lot of the argumentation based on research that I've read is tiresome and inconclusive at best, leaving me to wonder what's the point. Researchers will lay out what seems to me absolutely conclusive evidence and then end up saying it somehow isn't. Still and all, I keep looking. But since I've waded though a ton of cases describing communication with the dead as well as having my own experience in this area, this is not now what I'm really looking for either.
  9. mac

    mac Staff Member

    I'm glad you agreed with the points I made earlier. Re your last sentence, just what is it you're looking for? Something personally definitive that you'd see as proof of survival? Are you still not persuaded of its authenticity?
  10. genewardsmith

    genewardsmith Active Member

Share This Page