An explanation for OBEs in the book "Consciousness Beyond the Body"

[orian]

Below is an explanation for OBEs in the book "Consciousness Beyond the Body Evidence and Reflections".

"Researchers have been able to pin-point the areas of the brain that are associated with OBEs by clinically studying the brain activity of people who have spontaneous OBEs, those who have suffered damage to the brain, as well as creating a variety of in-lab situations that can result in OBEs.
 
Taken together, studies along those lines suggest that OBEs are mediated by a part of brain known as the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ). The TPJ is part of the brain stem, which maintains the body's sense of balance. This part of the brain is part of the vestibular system, or the inner ear. It integrates the information from our senses, and creates a model that determines the position of the body in relationship to the environment. When a brain structure in the TPJ area known as the right angular gyrus is stimulated, the brain temporarily loses its ability to integrate all the information of the senses, resulting in feelings of floating, spinning and shifting gravity (Blanke et al., 2004).

Other studies have shown that people who are prone to spontaneous OBEs also have brain interference in between the TPJ and the prefrontal cortex, the part of the higher brain that is largely associated with self-awareness and higher ordered thought (Blanke et al., 2005). It appears, therefore, that the TPJ has an important role in creating and maintaining a stable sense of self, and its disruption can lead to shifts in how the self is constructed.

Again, let me reiterate once more what has been stated in Chapter 1 and 2 on the point
that neurological information neither confirms nor denies the actual, or ontological, status of an OBE as an experience that occurs outside of the physical body. Rather, neuroscience studies show us exactly how the brain mediates the expression, and constraints, of perception as it relates to consciousness. What consciousness is, how it comes to be and where it goes are questions that neurology, in its present form, cannot answer.

The relevance to the neurological correlates of OBEs for the present discussion is that the strong correlation of OBEs to the parts of the brain that are known to construct the self – as well as the mechanisms that are related to lucid dreaming and sleep paralysis suggests that OBEs, like all conscious experiences, are constructed and not to be taken as stark 'reality'. Of course, the same could be said for waking, rational consciousness. We do not perceive the world, but rather we perceive constructed models of the world and ourselves, and these models are associated with physiological constraints."

The book can be downloaded free here:

https://trans4mind.com/download-pdfs/Consciousness%20Beyond%20the%20Body-Alexander%20De%20Foe.pdf

[Xanth]

In my opinion, science needs to answer the question of "where is consciousness?" before it can start to tackle the question of what are OBE's/Projections.  Obviously, our brains are going to have an interaction when we project - our brains control so much of what we perceive to be.

I hope we make these discoveries within my life time - but I'm feeling like this isn't going to be the case.  :/

[Lumaza]

 It's funny. There is a man named "DR. Eben Alexander" that used to teach exactly what they are saying above. That is until he had his own NDE. After that experience his new mission in life turned to educating people on what "reallY' is going on. A lady named Dr. Jill Bolt Taylor did the same thing. You can find her talk on "Ted Talk".

[Lumaza]

In my opinion, science needs to answer the question of "where is consciousness?" before it can start to tackle the question of what are OBE's/Projections.  Obviously, our brains are going to have an interaction when we project - our brains control so much of what we perceive to be.

I hope we make these discoveries within my life time - but I'm feeling like this isn't going to be the case.  :/

Science needs to go back to Scientific "exploration" and drop the "Scientism", that they seem to be stuck in. Is Pluto still a planet this week? I am so confused! 

[orian]

To be fair to the quote, it does say:

"Again, let me reiterate once more what has been stated in Chapter 1 and 2 on the point that neurological information neither confirms nor denies the actual, or ontological, status of an OBE as an experience that occurs outside of the physical body. Rather, neuroscience studies show us exactly how the brain mediates the expression, and constraints, of perception as it relates to consciousness. What consciousness is, how it comes to be and where it goes are questions that neurology, in its present form, cannot answer."

[Xanth]

To be fair to the quote, it does say:

"Again, let me reiterate once more what has been stated in Chapter 1 and 2 on the point that neurological information neither confirms nor denies the actual, or ontological, status of an OBE as an experience that occurs outside of the physical body. Rather, neuroscience studies show us exactly how the brain mediates the expression, and constraints, of perception as it relates to consciousness. What consciousness is, how it comes to be and where it goes are questions that neurology, in its present form, cannot answer."

Sounds like Alexander is defeated before even trying.  LoL

I don't believe for a second that the question cannot be answered, I believe that we haven't even begun to ask the correct questions in order to be finding what really needs finding. 

[Lumaza]

I don't believe for a second that the question cannot be answered, I believe that we haven't even begun to ask the correct questions in order to be finding what really needs finding.

just like my Forum signature here says "The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence."  Nicolai Tesla

[EscapeVelocity]

In agreement with, and adding to Xanth and Lumaza comments-

My general complaint is that 'science' (or worse yet, scientism) has not and will not recognize the field of consciousness...science insists the idea of consciousness is just a false byproduct of physical brain activity...when actually, I think it is likely the other way around (to some degree).

Just from a personal perspective, since the age of about a year and a half, I have been aware and suspected the condition of consciousness within my own field of activity...and all the many decades since then, have only gone on to confirm that. Is that a 'construct' of my own mind, based on artificial and often incorrect sensory data? Okay, so what if it is? My artificial construct is not inherently better or worse than anyone else's...go ahead, prove me wrong! the best we can do is to arrive at some general consensus or agreement. And, in my own case, my construct works for me...yours is your own problem.

The medical study described, I read the highlights several years ago...and was not particularly impressed. These med techs stimulate the TPJ with some voltage and induce vague sensations of 'floating or weightlessness'...they then announce they have created an OBE in their patients. This is not an OBE and they apparently have never experienced an OBE, much less described it as one of the very many diverse types.

So, I don't completely discredit it (except for the experience part!), but maybe it does describe some limited aspect of how the experience may be translated and reported within the organic brain. But then, they want to say their experiment describes the 'limitations and constraints' of the organic system in defining 'SELF'...and I find this characterization as nearly criminal. These researchers, in qualifying some several synaptic firings to definitions of SELF, I find almost offensive...the study, as so many governmental studies do these days, uses the qualified language to say, the results 'suggest' that OBE experiencers are having synaptic disruptions within the TPJ which indicate lack of Self-indentification and awareness and mental stability...that is what it reads like...

I will say this about that- Spending the last ten years, reading the reports of/texting with/ PM'ing with/phone convos with more than a few seasoned, experienced members here on the Pulse...I have found them to be THE MOST stabile, mature, intelligent, spiritual, practical, self-confident and evolved people I have ever communicated with...did many of us start out Life a bit confused? Absolutely, but that process of answering Life questions only served to strengthen our characters. In any conflict of mental or emotional nature, I would stand with any of them.

Sorry, this medical brain crap about misdefining 'floating sensations'...these people have NO idea of what is being discussed. They need to spend three weeks at The Monroe Institute...and even then, I'm not sure that would do it...but guess what? Not my problem!

[Xanth]

The medical study described, I read the highlights several years ago...and was not particularly impressed. These med techs stimulate the TPJ with some voltage and induce vague sensations of 'floating or weightlessness'...they then announce they have created an OBE in their patients. This is not an OBE and they apparently have never experienced an OBE, much less described it as one of the very many diverse types.

So, I don't completely discredit it (except for the experience part!), but maybe it does describe some limited aspect of how the experience may be translated and reported within the organic brain. But then, they want to say their experiment describes the 'limitations and constraints' of the organic system in defining 'SELF'...and I find this characterization as nearly criminal. These researchers, in qualifying some several synaptic firings to definitions of SELF, I find almost offensive...the study, as so many governmental studies do these days, uses the qualified language to say, the results 'suggest' that OBE experiencers are having synaptic disruptions within the TPJ which indicate lack of Self-indentification and awareness and mental stability...that is what it reads like...

That's pretty much my opinion on it as well.  Very clinical, yet missing the experiential part of the "OBE".
Although, they MIGHT have found the "trigger" for it... I always call it the projection reflex, maybe that's what they found.  The gateway, sort to speak.  The human brain must have a mechanism for triggering a projection in relation to consciousness.  Greater research is definitely required.  Hopefully they can connect it to "consciousness" itself, somehow.

[Lumaza]

 Scientism strikes again!   
https://frontier.yahoo.com/news/scientists-pinpointed-moment-humanity-almost-163138664.html

[Kodemaster]

The earliest evidence of the use of fire to cook food dates from 780,000 years ago in what is now modern-day Israel, the authors noted.

Fascinating -- I love Israel and hope to return. I left part of my heart there.

[Xanth]

I've been REALLY BORED at work the last little bit, so I've been reading Alexander's book.

I'm on chapter four now...

So far, it's entirely written from the position of Materialism. 
I'm hoping that changes very soon... this was the fear I had when Alexander De Foe was doing his survey for this. 

I'm really looking forward to Robert Waggoner's chapter, but at this point I'm not very hopeful.  LoL

OMG and the fourth chapter starts with this drivel:

This chapter is a thought experiment about the potential for an evolutionary function, or functions, for out-of-body experiences (OBEs).

This proves that they're looking at this from, in my opinion, the entirely wrong perspective.  We'll never scientifically figure this stuff out looking at it from this angle.

It looks like nobody proof-read this book either, there are copious grammar and spelling mistakes.  That's a shame, because it really does take away from the content.
The other thing which bugs me is their constant use of the phrase "it's just a dream" - or something to that effect.  They should know better that we don't understand what a dream is, so using it as a point of comparison is completely and utterly meaningless.

Anyway, I continue to read... hopefully this gets better.  LOL

What consciousness is, how it comes to be and where it goes are questions that neurology, in its present form, cannot answer.

A direct quote from chapter four... which is a good start.