--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > Terrible last paragraph, gives the game away. > > Well, no, the studies do *suggest* this. They just don't > do anything more than suggest.
They suggest it only if you don't want to look at more mundane explanations. To stop searching once a cherished belief has been apparently confirmed would be a mistake here. As I say around a third of people who have the dead relatives component also meet live ones, which means it's a crock - at least as far as being some sort of "real" experience goes. But it's a fascinating thing alright. > Again, if the studies can successfully challenge > materialism, that's a game-changer in and of itself. > > > All there is is the stuff of physics. If it doesn't fit in > > with that, where is it? > > Your first sentence is the very premise that's being > called in question. A better way to phrase what you're > asking would be, "If the stuff of physics isn't all there > is, where is the stuff that isn't physics?" That's a > perfectly legitimate question, but let's see if it needs > to be asked first. Obviously, but suggestions of eternal life *are* asking the question. If there is a transcendent realm it's going to have to interact with our own for this stuff to be objective, therefore it will be measurable.
