Originally Posted by awuh1

I will try to answer your questions and stay within the guidelines of the secular forum. At the same time I will try to keep the discussion relevant to your initial post concerning scientific method, scientism and critical thinking. I would suggest that as you read my response, you pay very close attention to your own thinking. It may be instructive. Can the meaning behind your experience change? I'm not sure I understand the question precisely, but yes, I think that it can. The only way I can imagine that it would change, would be if I were to have another similar experience. You have to understand that the nature of the experience was so profound that I cannot now imagine how other "explanations" involving brain chemistry, psychological states etc. could even come close providing an "explanation". The psychological/neurological side of things is part of my formal training. I cannot imagine a satisfactory explanation using these methods... but I'm all ears. "When you contemplate the experience what emotions are at play, would I be right if I said it was an experience where you kind of feel a low level connectedness, or perhaps even a feeling like a background very subtle vibration"? No. The experience was more of an IN YOUR FACE type of experience. There was nothing subtle about it. It was intense, and it was overwhelming. It left me with a sense of awe. It is something that is so very difficult to express. Our everyday experience provides no references. One of the elements was direct information transfer but without words. This is the reason I have been drawn to the topic of near death experiences (NDEs). One of the elements that is commonly reported (by people who have temporarily entered a state of clinical death and returned) is communication which is direct and completely nonverbal. I can relate. "I to get irritated by contempt prior to investigation". So let me ask. Have you made a judgment about the cause of my experience? (This is a rhetorical question by the way ) If not, I would say you are keeping an open mind. But what does that investigation entail?? This is the best question of all IMO. I'm not sure if there is a one size fits all answer but I do have an opinion. I think that knowing the true nature of reality is probably the most profound question we can ask. We should approach it in that light, and with the diligence and open mindedness that it deservers. No less. The degree of that diligence and open mindedness will depend on the individual. The problem for science, with experiences such as mine, is that conditions cannot be set up to replicate the experience. That does not mean that they do not exist, or that they are other than what they seem. Least of all does it mean that a materialistic explanation for them will always be sufficient. By the same token I think people should subject their experiences to examination by whatever means possible. They should examine their beliefs and motivations for holding those beliefs, for there is quite possibly much more to learn by doing so. Hell, I got a definitive answer and it seems like it was only the beginning of a learning curve.