Near Death Experience Research and Science

Since near death experience research deals with reports of inner experiences and these experiences are not publicly accessible, it is not in the strict sense scientific. That is not to say that the research is not rigorous or that its explanations are not true, just that it is operating beyond the scope of normal science.

Of the different areas of research that suggest life after death, the most promising seems to be near death experience research. This is because the experience is fairly common (although not universal) among those who were close to death and it involves all sorts of people, most of whom were not involved with this sort of thing before.

These researchers have also been fairly careful in the ways that they interview experiencers and in how they handle their data. The experiences themselves have been fairly consistent across different categories of people and have resisted explanation in a purely physical fashion. They have also at times had elements that could be subjected to physical testing, such as what the doctors were saying and doing in a different room or what was happening on a different floor as they drifted toward the tunnel.

There is the problem that there is now a cottage industry in near death experience books, so the profit motive needs to be considered. When people are in the position to make money from what they write, they may not always clearly explain evidence that is anomalous or present other explanations than those their audience wants to hear. These books have taken on more and more of a religious overtone instead of impartial research. Also, potential subjects are more likely now to be aware of the elements of the near death experience. This might influence their own experiences or reports.

Near death experiences, also, by their very nature are not publicly accessible experiences. Theories about them cannot be tested easily. For example, you cannot get together a test group of people who have not heard about near death experiences, kill them, revive them, and then ask what they have experienced. Also, you do not want to prowl around hospitals making sure that good candidates are insulated from influences that would invalidate the test. This means that evidence will be episodic and opportunistic.

So near death experiences are largely outside of the realm that science normally considers. This does not mean that the experiences are invalid or that the research is sloppy. It would be fair to say though that is not scientific in the strict sense of the term.