Part 2 of Carter's 3 books

Review of Chris Carter’s book “SCIENCE AND THE NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE: How Consciousness Survives Death” (Inner Traditions, 2010)

[4/28/11 Update: Carter is going to be releasing a revised edition soon. I'll add details to this review after I read the revised edition]

I’m hesitant to interpret NDEs (and death bed visions) as evidence for postmortem survival (more than I was in the past). If I had to put a number on it, I am anywhere from 50% to 65% confident of the survivalist interpretation of NDEs, and future arguments/studies could push me in either direction (for or against the survivalist interpretation).

That said, Chris Carter’s book is well-argued. I agree with NDE expert Dr. Bruce Greyson that this is “the best book on NDEs in years”, even for people who disagree with the author.

(In my opinion, the runner-up is the massive 2007 book “Irreducible Mind” by Kelly and Kelly et al.).

In part 1, Carter lays out a model of mind-brain relationship that is compatible with both dualism and observations from neuroscience. In building this model, he discusses (and builds upon) William James’ “transmission” model, ancient and modern ideas of mind-body interaction, neuroscience data, the relationship between consciousness and contemporary physics (which includes a discussion on “the dreaded interaction problem”), philosophy of science,* theories of life (including Sheldrake’s hypothesis of morphic resonance and fields), and whether the brain stores memories or tunes into them (Carter argues that both ideas are compatible with neuroscience data). Critics often say that advances in neuroscience show the absolute dependence of mind on brain; they say that minds cannot exist without brains. Drugs, alcohol, aging, and head injuries can alter personality and memory retrieval because of their effects on the brain. So how can personality (and the overlapping memory retrieval) continue to exist after brain death? Read this book to find out. Part 1 alone is worth the price of purchase. Part 1 also deals with the objections of several skeptics on the compatibility (or alleged incompatibility) of dualism and neuroscience data, including Paul Edwards and Daniel Dennett.

(* Carter has a longer discussion on philosophy of science in his first book)

After describing the aforementioned model, the author then presents arguments for it. He argues from a careful examination of Near Death Experiences (NDEs) and death bed visions. His discussion of NDEs includes their features (both “core” and unusual features), cross-cultural similarities and differences, possible cases of veridical observations during the NDE (i.e. cases where subjects report events that are later verified by others), and NDEs among the blind (including those born blind).

Critics of the survivalist (or “transcendental”) model have offered several alternatives, including psychological theories, physiological theories, and varying combinations. Carter discusses Susan Blackmore’s “dying brain theory”, the ketamine model, the G-force induced loss of consciousness model, various drug models, magnetic and electrical stimulation models, the excessive carbon dioxide model, the oxygen starvation model, the endorphins model, temporal lobe seizures, fantasy and wishful thinking, dissociated states, imaginative reconstructions, semiconscious perception, and birth memories. However, one by one, Carter provides a devastating critique of each alternative model. He demonstrates that they simply cannot account for the actual features of NDEs, alone or in combination.

Aside from the (current) utter failure of alternative explanations, Carter also defends the survivalist interpretation by citing possible veridical cases, NDEs among the blind, and similarities with death bed visions. He suggests that the best explanation is the one given by most NDE-subjects themselves (i.e. that they really are experiencing other realms of existence).

This book is part two in a series of three books by the author. The first book is “Parapsychology and the Skeptics” (2007), which makes a convincing case for the existence of some psi phenomena (and in the process also exposes weak objections by critics... click here for my review of it). Carter’s next book will look at reincarnation, apparitions, and mediumistic communications under fraud-resistant conditions (including several Leonora Piper cases, according to an email from Carter). These separate lines of evidence each point towards postmortem survival and they converge to make a very compelling cumulative case.

I’m glad that Carter also highlights examples of certain skeptics distorting or misusing data (e.g. Shermer’s misuse of Pim van Lommel’s Lancent paper). All too often, certain individual critics of parapsychology have distorted data and played unfairly. This was explored more thoroughly in Carter’s first book. I’m not saying (and Carter certainly isn’t saying) that all skeptics do that. People on both sides of the debate have played unfairly, and it needs to be pointed out whenever it happens.

With all of that being said, the AWARE study has the potential to strengthen or weaken the survivalist interpretation of NDEs. Of course, it won’t (or shouldn’t) be the last word. But if the results are negative— in the sense of NDE-OBE subjects making observational claims that are falsified* — then the survivalist interpretation of NDEs will be severely weakened. IF the AWARE study is negative in that sense, I hope that people will still buy and read Carter’s book for two reasons. First, Carter provides excellent discussions on physics, mind-brain models, and non-evidential aspects of NDEs. Second, Carter’s case is very suggestive, and a negative outcome from AWARE shouldn’t be the final word.

(* For example, let's say patient X has a classic NDE-OBE in which they observe their nurse performing jumping jacks in the ICU during surgery. Now let's say that the claim is falsified because video footage shows that the nurse did not perform any jumping jacks. Worse, X's false observation occurs without any verified observations. If the AWARE project produces many X cases then it would greatlt weaken the survivalist interpretation in my mind)

----- CRITICISMS -----

Unfortunately, Carter does not directly deal with Gerald Woerlee or Keith Augustine. Some of their claims can still be countered by what Carter says, but I wish that Carter had at least mentioned their work.

Also, in my judgment, the best "veridical" cases are not ironclad. That isn't Carter's fault, of course, but I remain hesitant because the current database of "veridical" NDEs can be picked at and have holes poked through it (though I also grant that some of the "holes" are unverifiable complaints). In my judgment, the case for authentic veridical NDEs is nowhere near as strong as the case for veridical "mediumship" produced by the British and American Societies for Psychical Research, though I hope it will be someday.

(Just to clarify on this last point, I'm 99% confident that the British and American SPRs documented genuine cases of psychic functioning in their best "medium" subjects, but I'm nowhere that confident in the paranormality of the best NDE cases)

Regardless of these shortcomings, I highly recommended this book and give it 4 out of 5 stars.