Re: [問題] 自由意志之為假的論述。

[MoonMan0319 (Innocent World)]

※ 引述《joehuang92 (喬喬)》之銘言：
: 1.瀕死經驗已有相當科學化的觀察。根據「復甦」雜誌在英國的
: 研究報導(研究者為Sam Parnia, 神經精神科專家，與Peter
: Fenwick, 醫師)，他們共統計63位經醫師宣布腦死後神奇復甦的
: 心臟病病患並訪問，當中大約有一成的人報告，在大腦停止活動
: 之後(即腦死)，自己仍然保有思想的功能，並能回憶和思考。這
: 項研究也同時已經排除缺氧腦死與藥物影響，並且在之後的後續
: 研究還有陸續增添的個案。荷蘭的相同研究也對334位宣布腦死
: 的心臟病病患進行同樣的實驗，當中甚至有病患宣稱自己在被急
: 救過程中能從房間上方觀測整個過程，甚至知道過程中醫師將自
: 己的假牙擺置的位置。心理學家John Beloff也宣稱「一個二元
: 世界，在物質世界之外必定有心靈的存在。」(載於人本主義者,
: 1965)。

其實下面的也很有問題，但是我只是想證明"英國研究"可信度，
就對到最底限好了，在怎麼樣sci還是有一定可信度，而且這期刊IF還有四點多，
也算是不差了吧，
我就把PAPER最後一段當作是結論貼上來：

If the occurrence of NDEs during a cardiac arrest, when the mind (the
collection of all our thoughts, feelings and emotions) and consciousness
(self awareness) appear to continue at a time when the brain is
non-functional and clinical criteria of death have been reached, can be
proven objectively through large studies, then this will lend some support to
this view. Although at present, this remains a mere possibility, if
investigated through appropriate studies it may have significant implications
not only for medicine but also for society as a whole. Such studies are
currently possible, and it has been proposed to test the claims of ‘
consciousness’ and being able to ‘see’ during cardiac arrest objectively
by use of hidden targets that are only visible from a vantage point above.
Although, at first these suggestions may sound rather unconventional. the
study of consciousness has itself for many years been thought of as
unconventional, but has now become a significant point of debate in
neuroscience. Therefore, a new way of thinking may be needed to provide an
insight into understanding this intriguing, yet largely undiscovered area of
science.

其實說的很曖昧，沒有直接提到腦死，只有說：
If the occurrence of NDEs during a cardiac arrest, when the mind (the
collection of all our thoughts, feelings and emotions) and consciousness
(self awareness) appear to continue at a time when the brain is
non-functional and clinical criteria of death have been reached,

再來，又有點想為自己開脫：
Although, at first these suggestions may sound rather unconventional. the
study of consciousness has itself for many years been thought of as
unconventional,

但是他的結論是：
but has now become a significant point of debate in neuroscience.

總而言之，他雖然說了cardiac arrest, brain nonfunction，通篇沒有提到腦死。
除了第一句說病人還有意識與感受我覺得說的有點過頭，
因為這對於phisiology的研究太不客觀，
最後還是回到神經科學，跟靈魂以及物質世界之外的東西，
一點關係也沒有。

補充一點，
Brain death is the irreversible end of all brain activity (including
involuntary activity necessary to sustain life) due to total necrosis of the
cerebral neurons following loss of brain oxygenation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_death
brain death 應該是專有名詞不要搞混，而且是irreversible，所以不可能醒來。

--
12月9日︰「有的人認為我是打手，那是因他們從來在自己的靈魂中，不知道什麼叫做一
個人發自於內在，來自於自己人格中對自由民主堅持，所能夠散發出來的力量。」(新聞
來源)
12月9日︰「我想是台灣太不習慣，教育界居然有人是有批判力、創造力、生命力的。」(
新聞來源)

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.112.60.93
※ 編輯: MoonMan0319     來自: 140.112.60.93        (05/10 14:46)
推 joehuang92:推這篇 我喜歡直接以實據作為討論的基底:)
→ joehuang92:先對brain death腦死的錯誤用詞致歉 但我認為與原行文
→ joehuang92:中的用詞並無太大衝突 以我對brain death狀態的所知
→ joehuang92:醫學上並無證據表示腦死狀態的人對痛苦與角膜反射神經
→ joehuang92:等神經作用有反應 也因此神經是處於不作用狀態
不是...重點是，他要講科學的事情，不是靈魂...
※ 編輯: MoonMan0319     來自: 140.112.60.93        (05/10 15:07)
推 joehuang92:我的原行文指我上一篇對於意識與大腦獨立的檢證:)