再論瀕死經驗的可信性——探索一些常見的質疑

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.筆者在2016 年撰文探討瀕死經驗 (Near-death Experience-NDE) 的可信性指出還沒有充分證據支持「醫學科學或心理學的理論能充分和全面解釋NDE 的現象」這觀點我也認為「NDE 的存在是不能抹殺的而且NDE 似乎提供了某程度證據顯示心靈的存在能獨立於身體存在所以死後生命的可能性是不能輕率否定的。」但我從未說過我能絕對證明NDE 的可信性也肯定「學術的爭辯還會繼續更多的研究也須進行」。劉彥方與冼偉林對我作出回應且基本上採取批判的態度及偏向懷疑瀕死經驗的可信性。我在此文對他們作出回應一方面指出他們對我的一些誤解另一方面繼續探討他們對瀕死經驗的質疑例如瀕死經驗個案的可靠性、對瀕死經驗的科學解釋以及一些方法論問題等等。我再次重申我並沒有宣稱我能絕對證明NDE 的可信性但認為「相信最少有一些NDE 是可靠的」是一個合理的信念(reasonable belief) 而劉彥方與冼偉林的批判並未能推翻這點。The author argued for the credibility of at least some near-death experiences (NDEs) in a previous paper (Kwan 2016), pointing out the lack of sufficient evidence to support the claim that physiological or psychological theories had already fully explained the entire NDE phenomenon. The author proposes that we should not dismiss the existence of NDEs, and states that they seem to offer some support for the ability of the soul to exist independently of the body. Thus, we should not dismiss the possibility of life after death. However, the author has never claimed that he can absolutely demonstrate the veridicality of NDE, and he has explicitly stated that the academic debate will continue and more research should be conducted.In their previous writings, Dr. Joe Lau and Dr. William Sin doubted the credibility of NDEs.In this paper, the author responds to their criticisms, clarifying some of their misunderstandings and further exploring their doubts about NDE, such as the reliability of NDE reports, the scientific explanations of NDE, and some methodological issues.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 177 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.