Science and love, music, art, etc. (The limitations of science)

by David Turell , Monday, February 23, 2009, 20:50 (5549 days ago) @ George Jelliss

DHW then seizes upon my use of the phrase "I maintain that..." as indicating my subjectivity, but I was merely being polite. To rephrase my statement: It is a fact that DT is too willing to accept accounts of subjective experiences as evidence. It is a fact that objectivity requires a more sceptical approach. 
> 
> DHW writes: I maintain that you are too willing to dismiss subjective experiences as evidence; objectivity requires a more open-minded approach. Your idea of objectivity is not the same as mine. Both our concepts of objectivity are subjective.
> 
> This is just playing with words. I've said before that I don't dismiss subjective experiences as evidence. I place less value on them. And this is not just my personal opinion, it is an application of scientific method. Verifiable experiences carry more weight. - Since I am being used as an example, let me explain my position about NDE's. I have rejected Susan Blakemore's opinion that they are hallucinations. No medical doctor would conclude they are such. Roughly 75% follow the same pattern or story. They are coherent, not jumbled. NDE's always talk to the dead. They are verifiable if they describe something a third party can verify, and that has happened many many times, expecially about 'knowing' that someone has died recently, and they NDEer cannot have known that before their episode.
While on a short vacation last week I spoke with a retired priest who vists hospices for the patients. He told me many of them describe talking with dead relatives just before they die themselves. This is not verifiable but is an interesting aspect of the issue. Also he described patients asking relatives to leave the room for a short interval. When the relatives return the patient has died, as if they knew or allowed the end willfully. I have told George one cannot do double-blind studies with this type of study, but, to repeat, they can be verified! - Further George's Gestalt is to accept nothing but peer-reviewed results, especially double-blinded. Everyone has built in biases! They cannot be avoided and at times are not recognized in themseives by the most astute persons.