Philosophy on Human Nature - Essay Example

? PHILOSOPHY ON HUMAN NATURE Philosophy s Philosophy on Human Nature Among all the questions that areinteresting simultaneously for science, philosophy, religion and literature, it seems the most urgent and at the same time the most disputable and vague is the query about the sense of life. Taking into account that there are a lot of literary works and researches written on the topic of eternal life, every study, and especially each philosophic or religious doctrine, has its own unique explanation. In the life of every normal person, there is such a moment when a question about the end of individual existence on the planet arises. Humans are the only beings who realize their mortality and are able to make a death the most sensational topic for discussions. Inevitability of own death is accepted by people not as an abstract verity but something that is able to bring the biggest emotional shock and touch the deepest feelings of personal inner world. To find the answers on the questions of life sense and existence of life after death, mythology, religion, philosophy and even art present numerous arguments to support both sides of the coin. The theme of life and death is everlasting and essential for the spiritual culture of humanity in all its manifestations. This permanent philosophical matter is widely covered in print and broadcasting media. Reflecting about possibility and existence of eternal life is intriguing, first of all, because we do not know the exact explanation with the lack of doubts in its veracity. Everything that is unconceivable and unknown causes interest and stimulates imagination. The problem of death and everything that concerns it has been mentioned since ancient times by Plato. Humanity may have a great hope for the existence of life after death; however, there is no any certainty or scientific proof for conjecture. The only thing left is to make assumptions, which are able to form person’s belief and positive attitude or distrust and rejection. The discussion of death may cause various reactions including even groundless prejudices and undisguised fear. However, among respectable scientists, there are a lot of optimists who present persuasive arguments to believe that after death human’s soul does not disappear. One of such literary works that stimulates thinking process and force people to review own opinions is the article of Andrew Dell’Olio, who claims that near-death experience (NDE) is a valid ground to believe in eternal life. Due to the stories of people who have experienced near-death, it has been concluded that when a person dies, the brain still remains its activity and consciousness; otherwise it is hard to explain how people who return to life remember everything that has happened in addition to the new visions that they have seen during the death of the body. According to the statistics, the number of clinical deaths increases because of the technological development and innovations implemented to the medical services, which help to revive a person after death. Therefore, today there are more and more people who have had NDE and based on their memories and feelings some significant conclusions can be made. Despite ambiguity of philosophers’ attitude, Dell’Olio tries to find out whether there is a rational basis to believe that NDEs prove the eternal life. It is evident that studies on the matter of near-death should take into account such factors as mind and body illnesses of the patient and the nature of personal identity. In spite of the fact that life after death is genuinely philosophical issue, it is fair to admit that there is a tendency of philosophers to ignore this question mostly because of its over popularity and urgency. Materialists consider that NDE does not represent any interest for philosophy simply because it is only hallucinations, which are caused by the decrease of brain’s activity. Basing his argument on the religious aspects, Dell’Olio explains the nature of near-death experiences that appear in a state of the absence of body’s vital functions, which are rehabilitated later on. People who have faced clinical death provide descriptions of the visions due to which specific generalizations can be made. Hence, all patients during clinical death see the darkness and move through a tunnel or meet dead relatives and friends. Also there are numerous occasions when entire life is reviewed as a movie in a couple of seconds. According to Atwater, after a near-death, most people are positively influenced which forces them to obtain more respect to other individuals and life in general, while others experience negative consequences, such as fear of punishment and hell (as cited in Dell’Olio, 2010, p. 116). It has been noted that materialists deliberately reject the rational basis of NDE because this is more convenient strategy for them otherwise entire materialistic values would be doubted. So it is just easier for them to consider that there is no veracity of NDEs. In contrast to this, Dell’Olio defines several reasons to reconsider materialistic underestimation of near-death experience. Hence, the author emphasizes the optimality of conditions and repetition of the cases. In addition, the fact that there is a solid coincidence in people’s descriptions of feelings and visions positively characterizes the nature of NDE. Also, as Dell’Olio states (2010), “there is a sense of phenomenological certainty to the experience” (p. 117). Therefore, despite generally accepted naturalistic view, there are sufficient grounds to consent that NDEs prove that life after death exists. A lot of scientists raise objections to the Dell’Olio’s ideas. Hence, some people think that NDEs are mere hallucinations provoked with medications or anesthesia; others assume that people in clinical death see memories or sometimes illusions, which the brain produces in the state of stress. Dell’Olio contradicts such statements with the argument that near-death experiences have higher vividness than hallucinations. Also, it has been noticed that many patients have not taken any medication, the levels of oxygen in the blood of such patients are high and they are always more alert than people who have been given opiates. Furthermore, there are no confusion and anxiety experienced by individuals in such conditions. In addition, it has been found that reactions of human organism during NDE are not the same as in case there is a loss of energy to the brain. The lucidity of near-death experience is unique therefore any comparison of its reactions with the organism’s behavior in other possible states is irrelevant. Analyzing the conjecture that near-death experience is a cluster of memories, it has been presumed that infants have totally different experiences than adults that is why their memory should not contain any visions that people usually see in the state of a near death. In addition, Sagan explains, “it is not likely that infants would experience the birth canal as a tunnel” (as cited in Dell’Olio, 2010, p. 118). Also, it is hard to suppose that the hospital’s light can be accepted by the brain of an infant more as a pleasant memory than a shock. Consequently, such assumptions raise a lot of doubts in the objections of skeptics who do not accept near-death experiences as veritable. Frequently, near-death experiences produce visions that differ from religious beliefs of individuals. The things that sometimes can be seen are hard to make up. The presumption that in a state of stress the brain produces only pleasant dreams is disputable since there are numerous cases of disagreeable visions. There is a theory that all human’s experiences take the specific place in the brain, but it does not deny the veracity of such experiences. Also, it is presumed that in case artificial conditions produce specific reaction of the organism, then it does not cancel the same reaction produced by its own in normal conditions this is why NDEs received with technological manipulations does not reject veracity of experiencing life after death being in near-death condition. Dell’Olio supports the idea of NDE’s proof of life after death also because there are no any other alternatives and valid explanations to the nature of near-death phenomenon particularly because it is difficult to explain how people manage to be aware about some events taken place while they have been in a state of clinical death. There are a lot of sensational cases when individuals describe people whom they have never met before but who are found to be dead later on. Taking into account the mystery of such question, Dell’Olio bases his arguments on a principle of credulity, which claims that if people see a specific phenomenon, they should believe in it unless they have a reason for disbelief. Consequently, as Dell’Olio states, there is no valid reason to disbelieve that life after death indeed exists according to the observations of people who have faced near-death. In a contrast to Dell’Olio, some people state that veracity of NDEs does not prove the existence of eternal life because individuals experience death temporary therefore further scientific researches may bring new discoveries and alternatives. It is supposed that near-death experience is not the same as full-blown death. However, the author grounds his theory based on a fact that there are similarities in external reactions during both processes, which allow presuming that inner dimensions are also analogous. Dell’Olio juxtaposes the near-death and near-collision claiming that the first notion means genuine but temporary death while the last one cannot be considered as collision at all. This is why visions and experiences caused by near-death can be the same during a full-fledged death. So there is a rational basis to believe that NDEs prove the existence of life after death. Another objection can be formulated based on the statement that conclusive evidence in this matter hardly will be ever found. However, the author claims that there is no need for this because most of person’s beliefs do not have any conclusive evidence, for instance, as a trust in God. Existence of NDEs raises further questions like whether there is a matter of temporary brain’s consciousness or eternal life. But taking into account that NDEs do not include a factor of time, there is a big hope that life after death takes place. It is obvious that some further corroboration would be extremely persuasive, but the most valid proof that can be offered is those people who have experienced clinical death. Their testimony is the most veritable ground for belief. Dell’Olio states that despite numerous literary works written by scientists, some of reports provide vague and even strange statements, which may impel a person to consider a rational basis of NDE as a false. Hence, the descriptions of A. J. Ayer add doubts to Dell’Olio’s comprehension because they differ from the author’s presentation and therefore are considered hardly plausible. The author suggests to differ imaginary NDE from authentic one. However, simultaneously, Dell’Olio wonders who exactly should judge what is real and what is not. As it has been already mentioned before, philosophy is prone to disregard the urgency of NDE mostly because that for materialists, to accept NDE means doubt in own beliefs. They realize that NDE could be a great defeater to prior values. The prominent change in philosophic doctrine happened in 1930s, when philosophers made attempt to convert all spiritual notions into physical aspects. Despite his sensational conclusions, Dell’Olio does not suggest to drop materialism because in most cases, its principles are true. But the author calls to take near-death experiences seriously and move away from skeptical attitude in a matter of life after death. Analyzing the article of Dell’Olio, it can be concluded that the author’s arguments seem persuasive enough. He provides logical statements and sufficient reflections that force to reconsider own views and start to believe that it is most likely that after death the human’s soul does not disappear and there is something mystical that comes when the body deceases. The principle of credulity seems quite fair and it should be taken into consideration while making any conclusions about near-death experiences. Also, finding out about people’s statements and testimonies, which Dell’Olio mentions, compels a reader to see commonness in all experiences. This agreement in opinion proves its veracity and some descriptions of the visions that contradict individual’s beliefs allow to presume that such things cannot be mere illusions. It is evident that hardly we will ever be able to know for sure whether life after death really exists, but such literary works as Dell’Olio’s article not only stimulate thinking activity but also give a great hope for belief in eternal life. Reference Dell’Olio, A. J. (2010). Do near-death experiences provide a rational basis for belief in life after death? SOPHIA, 49, 113-128. Read More