| Abstract: | Comments on the original article, "Implications of near-death experiences for a postmaterialist psychology," by B. Greyson (see record 2010-03251-005). Although I will only comment on the paper by Greyson (2010), my initial thoughts pertain to the whole section, which explicitly framed itself as a repudiation of materialism and a defense of spiritual psychology. I find neither of these positions palatable or fair to the nature of reality, which seems to scoff at our pedestrian attempts to tame it, whether by crass materialism or spiritualism. Both “spiritual materialism” and “crass materialism” are but different manifestations of the same maladies: The refusal to consider data that do not fit preconceptions (i.e., that one’s beliefs, whether spiritual or “scientistic” may be wrong or, at least, incomplete), methodological poverty (i.e., that one’s method of knowledge, whether experiential or experimental is the only or the best way to apprehend all of reality), and philosophical shallowness (e.g., the “secret” that we attract what happens to us, which is an insult to the countless victims of genocides and brutalities throughout history, or the pronouncements that consciousness has been “explained” when we have no idea even how electrochemical impulses become experiences). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
