How does the DMT world provide the personal conviction for an afterlife?

[dragonrider]

Dr. Eben Alexander is a neurosurgeon, who developed a severe case of bacterial meningitis, he fell into a coma and lost ALL brain function, there's no way that his physical brain would be capable of generating consciousness, yet when he recovered, he describes an amazing DMT like journey into consciousness...

So it doesn't always have to be chemical...

Can someone explain above to me in more detail? Can I get copy of the article or study that was done on the above. When they say lost ALL brain function was there no brain senses going off on the monitor, not even in the slightest? What test do they preform on someone to confirm they are brain dead? Was the patient body staying alive due to medical machines the DR's attached?

I still believe what I experience with DMT is chemical reaction. I have had extremely visual dreams and DMT feels like a dream but more intense. I have had dreams were I have thought I was awake, got up, got ready for work and than realised "oh shit I'm dreaming, wake up or I will be late"

With the above, maybe the person had DMT trip, it was the last thing they remember before brain switched off, maybe they experienced it while brain was still activity, but our brain has amazing ability to remember that because I'm sure they remembered their name as well when they came through

There's no way you can tell from brainscans that there is no activity going within the brain. Every technique to look into the living brain has it's imperfections. They measure bloodflow instead of activity within or between braincells, for instance. And i don't know if counsciousness by definition has to be related to the quanity, the degree of activity in the brain. Why would more activity nessecarily mean more counsciousness? Why wouldn't it be a certain type of activity, a certain quality of activity, instead of quantity?

 

[Valmar]

Actually my experiences, like yours, point to consciousness being separate from the body. But if all we are talking about is belief and experience, we are no longer having rational conversation.

All I mean to say is that we, collectively, can agree that the brain is responsible for at least some experience. If I damage or remove certain parts of your brain, you are no longer able to have certain experiences. There's hard evidence for that. No such evidence exists to show that a person can have experiences without a brain. That doesn't mean its not possible.

Even those having OBEs need a brain in order to remain incarnated... the brain acts as the focal point for consciousness, so yeah, I see what you're saying. Without a brain, the ego, the "person", ceases to exist as it is.

The DMT provides evidence that there is certainly more than this illusory plane of physicality... but how DMT does what it does, let alone why, in the context of the brain, is still a profound mystery. Perhaps one we incarnates cannot solve from the level of ego.

Just as a thought experiment, if someone was to have pieces of his brain slowly removed, at what point would he move into the "afterlife experience?" If everything was removed except the necessary bits for breathing, heartbeat, etc., would he already be in the afterlife? Or would he idle until even those died, and then experience comes flooding back?

We have no idea, because as far as I know, no such inhumane experiment has been performed...

Well, there is this curious TED talk, at least:

The past lives thing is fascinating. I myself get bouts of telepathy where I pick up weirdly specific thoughts and memories from other people. But I don't understand the assumption that there can be no physical explanation for this. I have an idea involving simulation theory and access to shared memory/memory that hasn't yet been reallocated, but that's not for this thread.

I've had minor experiences of telepathy, as well, all involving having thoughts in my mind, then someone saying them seconds later. Three times has this happened... first time after my last major healing Ayahuasca journey. Another thread, I guess.

 

[MissDMT]

Dr. Eben Alexander is a neurosurgeon, who developed a severe case of bacterial meningitis, he fell into a coma and lost ALL brain function, there's no way that his physical brain would be capable of generating consciousness, yet when he recovered, he describes an amazing DMT like journey into consciousness...

So it doesn't always have to be chemical...

Can someone explain above to me in more detail? Can I get copy of the article or study that was done on the above. When they say lost ALL brain function was there no brain senses going off on the monitor, not even in the slightest? What test do they preform on someone to confirm they are brain dead? Was the patient body staying alive due to medical machines the DR's attached?

I still believe what I experience with DMT is chemical reaction. I have had extremely visual dreams and DMT feels like a dream but more intense. I have had dreams were I have thought I was awake, got up, got ready for work and than realised "oh shit I'm dreaming, wake up or I will be late"

With the above, maybe the person had DMT trip, it was the last thing they remember before brain switched off, maybe they experienced it while brain was still activity, but our brain has amazing ability to remember that because I'm sure they remembered their name as well when they came through

There's no way you can tell from brainscans that there is no activity going within the brain. Every technique to look into the living brain has it's imperfections. They measure bloodflow instead of activity within or between braincells, for instance. And i don't know if counsciousness by definition has to be related to the quanity, the degree of activity in the brain. Why would more activity nessecarily mean more counsciousness? Why wouldn't it be a certain type of activity, a certain quality of activity, instead of quantity?

I don't mean that more activity equals more consciousness, I mean brain activity would mean the brain is still activity to allow consciousness to occur. I believe once you lose all brain function including blood plus electrical signals you completely switch off, everything including thinking, feeling, mind

 

[Studio1one]

I think it is because the strong DMT experience really feels like death. You die, yet are still conscious - it is a sense that you have crossed over to the other side.

This leads people to the belief that death is not the end of consciousness.

Does it have validity? I dunno man.

 

[PsyDuckmonkey]

It seems that either you have a confrontational attitude, or something I said in the OP struck a nerve with you and thereby you retaliated by posting an attack on my OP in ways that clearly are not justified, by which I have proven above. If you want to argue, do it correctly and without attitude.

Being all high and mighty is pretty confrontational too.

Anyway, yes something definitely struck a nerve. The way I see it, you set up a straw puppet in your opening message to beat up. Asking people how the DMT world provides personal conviction for an afterlife is a valid, and open question. But asking them, and then following up with "and what if you are wrong", is just provocation in my opinion.

It is fully obvious that nobody can argue with "but what if not". It's not an argument, it's like what kids do in kindergarten, like "it's not" "yes it is" "it's not" "yes it is"... Well what if? In that case we just die and that's it, there's really no point in prolonging the discussion.

So that's why I was asking you what exactly you were expecting when asking the "question". People trying to explain how they got a subjective conviction of the seniority of spirit over matter (as it did in fact happen)? So that you can reply with "yea but how can you prove it" (as you more or less did)?

Well really, the only answer to that question is no how. That's why it's called a subjective conviction.

So the question remains, was your goal with this discussion to have someone present you irrefutable proof of their subjective conviction, or for you to logically deny someone's subjective conviction, or to get some kind of public validation for your own beliefs? The first is unfeasible, the second is called trolling at best, the third is well, whatever.

So my "confrontational" reaction was in response to the implications of asking such an unanswerable and insidious question.

 

[Valmar]

Can you think of how the DMT world provides a personal conviction of the afterlife? Because if you can, we can then analyze whether or not that processes is genuine or fallible.

How? The raw experience itself is powerful enough! Can't be measured through analyzing brainwaves and neurotransmitters alone, because the raw DMT experience is something that utterly defies materialist scientific explanations. The DMT experience is what it is ~ alien and utterly bizarre, but quite valid.

But then again my comment still stands that this could be just a really believable impression of realness when no such realness actually exists.

What? How do you know that this reality that our senses delude us into believing is really real? It seems real, but is really just a illusion, when viewed from the perspective of quantum physics. Everything is merely a mass of vibrations, which our senses turn into something coherent enough for us to navigate in.

If numerous people state that the DMT experience has a feeling of realness that surpasses that of this shared physical illusion ~ I'm quite happy to believe them, having had oral DMT Ayahuasca experiences that feel... more than sober perception.

Have you taken DMT? A good, hard hit? Have you drank strong doses of Ayahuasca and felt the raw energies it awakens from within oneself?

 

[Valmar]

what if that is just a personal conviction and nothing more? Is there not some possibility that you are believing something that actually is false? How would you know?

How would you know? Have you taken a strong dose of DMT, Psilocybin or Ayahuasca?

Of course we all have our personal convictions. What you believe might actually be false, in turn. How would you know?

There is a thing known as confirmation bias and we as primates all fear death. Therefore any single piece of information in favor of the afterlife may confirm to us what we want to believe rather than what is.

You have a strong confirmation bias of your own that you seem to be seeking to reaffirm.

Therefore, any single piece of information in favour against the afterlife may confirm to you what *you want to believe*, rather than what it is.

See how this works? You almost seem to be arguing that those who take psychedelics and come out with a different perspective on reality, namely that of non-physical consciousness not tied to the physical brain that survives bodily death, are somehow just deluding themselves.

But, who are *you* to insinuate, arrogantly, that *your* perspective is somehow more valid?

You haven't even made arguments for your perspective, or even justified why you are correct.

Yet, eg has posted some wonderful McKenna quotes that point out that life and reality are weirder than the scientific materialist worldview presumes.

 

[acacian]

A lot of things in life that we experience give us inklings in certain directions.. I don't think it anymore wrong to explore inklings from a psychedelic experience than one of our everyday reality - even if they can't be proven

Whether or not people can validate their ideas that the dmt experience has led them to explore, at the very least it serves to break down belief structures and prompt some very interesting questions. I think its very profound that a chemical induced experience so reliably produces these sorts of questions about reality. I think we have to accept though that there are certain things that just won't be able to be proven in the way you may hope. the proof is in the pudding imo.. (the pudding being hyperspace in this case)

There is a feeling of "knowing" that many feel from the experience.. its an inner knowing that can't really be "shown" to the skeptic in the form they hope. How can such inner knowledge be validated? I think time and time again the answer will come around that it just can't really.. the kind of proof you seek (or whether you seek proof at all) very much depends on the way you experience the world.

Regarding the OP, perhaps it would help if you outlined what constitutes proof in these instances?

I think Psyduckmonkey's most recent post summed things up well..

 

[Quetzal7]

DMT teached me about Death. Mostly about death actually ^^

I got experience where Death was the only way out. This one i had to go 3 times throuh to get it : death is the end of everything as you know it, it's the ultimate mystery. And the most important: you can be extremly thankful for it, it's your only exit door when you cannot handel the "game" anymore, when suffering (of your body or your soul) make life a permanent nightmare. Death is always there as an exit door. Thanks god!!!! I find WAY more terrifying the fact that i could be stuck somehow - somewhere, eventually in suffering, FOR EVER ! But affortunatly my individuality ends gracefully.

DMT teached me about confortable illusion and unconfortable truths. Living in USA shows me a way more dogmatic new age movement than europe : Life after death is a common beleive, it is "mainstream" inside the alternativ movement. It is the most easy way to slip under the carpet the issue of Death. It's a confortable nest that your ego is pleased to occupy : don't worry, you not gonna desapear little ego! So EASY. Makes so much sense that mainstream religions use the same rhetoric.

I'm didn't say there's "nothing" after death, but i understand my "INDIVI DUALITY" (my "body-mind individed") as my essence. And this will end as my body desapear. This makes sense with all my other beleives system about evolution, emergence of life and complex structure, self organising chaos...

This is now how i see DMT , in a simplistic way : it flush your brain with a giant interconnection that, as you breakthrough, connect yourself as a whole. You experience the reflection of all your deepest beleives, conscious and subconscious, emerging as one.

And most importantly, DMT teached me to be humble, and that the mystery of Life and Death is what it is : a giant mind bogging mystery. And i like it like this.

 

[hug46]

I think it is because the strong DMT experience really feels like death. .

I think it more likely that the experience feels like what one would imagine death to be like. As no one has ever come back from death to tell us what death is really like we can't say what it feels to be dead. There are the examples of people who have been clinically dead for a short period of time and then been revived which says to me that the subject wasn't dead in the first place and maybe if science evolves enough to revive someone after a longer period we could go on to say that death doesn't exist.

As for questioning someone's belief in the afterlife, i can see the value in questioning our beliefs and the reasons as to which we come to these conclusions, as it can give us personal insight. It becomes more complicated when we choose to question the validity of another person's experiences. If the belief in the afterlife helps someone to become a happier person and helps them to lead a more fulfilling life then that belief is valid. Objective truth is of little importance.

Furthermore if one were to prove to a skeptic that there was an afterlife then the chances are that they would be quite happy. If one were to prove categorically that there was no afterlife to a believer, they would probably be sad.It's abit cruel to do that.
Kind of like telling a 5 year old that father christmas doesn't exist. This would be even crueller if father christmas actually does exist. The only certainty about father christmas that i can confirm is that i haven't had a visit from him for a long time.

 

[Studio1one]

It does feel like death, it feels like you are dead / have died.

That doesn't mean to say that's what it actually feels like when you die but that is the subjective experience many people have. Death doesn't necessarily conform to the DMT experience.

I guess its similar to the fact the statements "I walk when i talk" and "I talk when I walk" are not the same. DMT feels like death does not mean that death feels like DMT.

Anyway, as I said in my first post, I have no idea of the validity of the experience, it is just subjective understanding.

 

[○]

In all my experiences with DMT over the years, i'd say in some fashion [though not solely or entirely] that this experience is a sort of preamble for that day-of-process [death].

Mēnōg existence made manifest.

The Chinvat Bridge with the cover/s thrown off through plant biochemical mediation.

 

[hug46]

It does feel like death, it feels like you are dead / have died.

That doesn't mean to say that's what it actually feels like when you die but that is the subjective experience many people have. Death doesn't necessarily conform to the DMT experience.

I guess its similar to the fact the statements "I walk when i talk" and "I talk when I walk" are not the same. DMT feels like death does not mean that death feels like DMT.

Anyway, as I said in my first post, I have no idea of the validity of the experience, it is just subjective understanding.

I understood from your first post about your take on validity. I was just ruminating in general in my other pargraphs and they weren't aimed at you. As for the death thing, am i being pedantic in thinking that it is a bit of a leap of faith to say that a DMT experience feels like death if we do not actually know what death feels like?

 

[Studio1one]

No I don't think you are being pedantic at all, I think it's an important point but I am not sure if it is a point of linguistics or philosophy.

Perhaps a more accurate phrase would be that it feels how I expect death to feel.

 

[hug46]

No I don't think you are being pedantic at all, I think it's an important point but I am not sure if it is a point of linguistics or philosophy.

Perhaps a more accurate phrase would be that it feels how I expect death to feel.

I am relieved that you gave that answer. If you had written yes i would have had to concede to the idea that i maybe becoming a prematurely senile curmudgeon.
I'll take the philosophy over the linguistics. What it is it to be dead? Anyone? I have forgetten who or what i am. Is this an ego death? And if so there must have been a part of me still there to know that i was aware. A part of my ego to bring this memory back. The nearest i have come to what i imagine death to be like is when i was anaesthatised (for 4 weeks) and i have no memory of any awareness untill the final week when the hospital staff gradually woke me up. If there was an afterlife and my spirit was a separate part of my body surely there would have been some kind of awareness.

In all my experiences with DMT over the years, i'd say in some fashion [though not solely or entirely] that this experience is a sort of preamble for that day-of-process [death].

I am glad that you are getting some kind of preparation for the big day Tatt and i know that it is inevitable (unless i happen to be already dead without realising it) but i am in no way prepared or happy to meet my maker for the foreseeable future.

 

[Bancopuma]

I remember the feeling of my breakthrough...there was an almighty electric/icy cracking sound that emanated from the centre of my head when the DMT hit...it was a large dose (100mg approx.), my first in a long time, and my vaping technique just really clicked...as I felt and heard this vibration/sound from my head, I was flung out my body and this reality at high speed and I encountered somewhere else, another dimension as immaculately formed and as seemingly real as this one. At the same time as this, I had no awareness of my body, physical reality or whether my eyes were open or closed. When I heard/felt that vibration/crack and my consciousness was seemingly flung out of my body, I remember my rational mind thinking, "That's it, you're dead". It simply felt at the time that there was no way I was coming back from something like that. Immediately prior to this I had known I was absolutely safe, ingesting a non-toxic substance. But this totally went out the window when it hit. So I can definitely relate to people's description of the DMT flash feeling like dying. Does it provide proof of an afterlife? I think that is a bit of a stretch. But it has definitely made me more curious and agnostic I guess you could say as to what may happen (a profound OBE and seeming contact with the deceased have added to this curiosity).

 

[fathomlessness]

It seems that either you have a confrontational attitude, or something I said in the OP struck a nerve with you and thereby you retaliated by posting an attack on my OP in ways that clearly are not justified, by which I have proven above. If you want to argue, do it correctly and without attitude.

Being all high and mighty is pretty confrontational too.

Anyway, yes something definitely struck a nerve. The way I see it, you set up a straw puppet in your opening message to beat up. Asking people how the DMT world provides personal conviction for an afterlife is a valid, and open question. But asking them, and then following up with "and what if you are wrong", is just provocation in my opinion.

It is fully obvious that nobody can argue with "but what if not". It's not an argument, it's like what kids do in kindergarten, like "it's not" "yes it is" "it's not" "yes it is"... Well what if? In that case we just die and that's it, there's really no point in prolonging the discussion.

So that's why I was asking you what exactly you were expecting when asking the "question". People trying to explain how they got a subjective conviction of the seniority of spirit over matter (as it did in fact happen)? So that you can reply with "yea but how can you prove it" (as you more or less did)?

Well really, the only answer to that question is no how. That's why it's called a subjective conviction.

So the question remains, was your goal with this discussion to have someone present you irrefutable proof of their subjective conviction, or for you to logically deny someone's subjective conviction, or to get some kind of public validation for your own beliefs? The first is unfeasible, the second is called trolling at best, the third is well, whatever.

So my "confrontational" reaction was in response to the implications of asking such an unanswerable and insidious question.

The way I see it, the OP was just simply asking "should we believe what DMT shows us about the afterlife" and did so in a way of asking "How does it do that?"

Because by seeing how it does it, you can see whether or not it can be a reliable thing to believe in.

I don't think the OP wasn't asking you to prove it so much as he was pointing to the fact that you can't prove it invalidates any sort of personal conviction you may have no matter how convincing it is, which is a sound and valid statement to make rationally and philosophically. It is important because the same thing has been going on for thousands of years in religion and small children (as someone mentioned santa clause :lol: )

Perhaps the OP was looking for discussion on the matter as opposed to a finite solution to solve all problems. In fact rarely do conversations with people end in completion. Conversation is like a dance or a work of art, it is more in the process and not the finality of how it happens that you learn more about what is going on in our minds. As I understand it, inquiries in to logically analyzing people's subjective convictions is not trolling which you seem to state it is. That is indeed how we arrive at a more truthful and less deceived way of living and is the reason why the westernized models of the world are more logical and practical because we have analyzed religious beliefs systems (like ISIS) with the same logical integrity as n0thing is doing to the subjective convictions people have with DMT and see how deceptive it could be or how unaligned with reason it is to believe in metaphysical states. Imagine if a child grew up and spent the rest of her life believing in santa claus and that she was going to the north pole when she dies? Sure, she is entitled to believe that but that entitlement doesn't make it any more reasonable. For this reason, no one can deny that it is of prime importance that we try and free ourselves from delusions and that includes illusory beliefs in unfounded things.

So the questions of HOW dmt gives us such a strong personal conviction is a very genuine question. For if by analyzing how we knew santa clause existed and all we got was "because mummy and daddy told us so" then we would know where our faults may lie.

So I assume that is why the question is how can we analyze further how dmt gives us such strong impressions? Which I think as of yet has been missed in this thread completely, probably because of it's difficulty or perhaps impossibility to do so.

I think the topic title should be change to "is intuitive knowledge trustworthy?". As we can see time and time again, rationality doesn't always provide us with adequate solutions to problems (like that of the afterlife), but this doesn't necessarily mean intuitive knowledge is a replacement, does it?

 

[fathomlessness]

You haven't even made arguments for your perspective, or even justified why you are correct.

From what I can make out I don't think he needs to, he was advocating suspended judgement (agnosticism). You are advocating otherwise, therefore the burden of proof lies upon you, not him.

 

[○]

In all my experiences with DMT over the years, i'd say in some fashion [though not solely or entirely] that this experience is a sort of preamble for that day-of-process [death].

I am glad that you are getting some kind of preparation for the big day Tatt and i know that it is inevitable (unless i happen to be already dead without realising it) but i am in no way prepared or happy to meet my maker for the foreseeable future.

I wonder about about what I highlighted above in your quote...

'Preparation' ..I wonder. Honestly I don't think i'll ever be prepared to any sufficient degree, because I think when the moment comes it'll be beyond all this. I have a feeling [and i've said this before] ..that the joke will be on me..

I know that where I stand right now, relative to my [supposed?] past ..that the years of dissolving the boundaries [which im sure some/many here can relate], especially after experiencing what I have through DMT/changa/brews/pharma, that the worriment of death [process] is lessened very much.

I don't know what death is, as is nobody does ..though [and I might be going out on a limb here?] I have this unshakeable feeling and/or knowing that at it's core - it's nothing more or less than a process, and a process which I know is not the end.. as all process leads/transmutes into something of another order, and this process leading to something far beyond our consensual reach.

all flows. there will never be rest..

 

[entheogenic-gnosis]

Dr. Eben Alexander is a neurosurgeon, who developed a severe case of bacterial meningitis, he fell into a coma and lost ALL brain function, there's no way that his physical brain would be capable of generating consciousness, yet when he recovered, he describes an amazing DMT like journey into consciousness...

So it doesn't always have to be chemical...

Can someone explain above to me in more detail? Can I get copy of the article or study that was done on the above. When they say lost ALL brain function was there no brain senses going off on the monitor, not even in the slightest? What test do they preform on someone to confirm they are brain dead? Was the patient body staying alive due to medical machines the DR's attached?

I still believe what I experience with DMT is chemical reaction. I have had extremely visual dreams and DMT feels like a dream but more intense. I have had dreams were I have thought I was awake, got up, got ready for work and than realised "oh shit I'm dreaming, wake up or I will be late"

With the above, maybe the person had DMT trip, it was the last thing they remember before brain switched off, maybe they experienced it while brain was still activity, but our brain has amazing ability to remember that because I'm sure they remembered their name as well when they came through

There's no way you can tell from brainscans that there is no activity going within the brain. Every technique to look into the living brain has it's imperfections. They measure bloodflow instead of activity within or between braincells, for instance. And i don't know if counsciousness by definition has to be related to the quanity, the degree of activity in the brain. Why would more activity nessecarily mean more counsciousness? Why wouldn't it be a certain type of activity, a certain quality of activity, instead of quantity?

-------

Encephalitis —Inflammation of the brain, usually caused by a virus. The inflammation may interfere with normal brain function and may cause seizures, sleepiness, confusion, personality changes, weakness in one or more parts of the body, and even coma.

Meningitis —An infection or inflammation of the membranes that cover the brain and spinal cord. It is usually caused by bacteria or a virus.

------

I'm not a "true believer" in this guy, I just saw a PBS documentary which featured his story and was intrigued by how similar his story was to the DMT flash, actually most near death experiences are very similar to a DMT flash...(doctor Rick strassman heavily indulges in the connection between DMT and after death conscious states in the book "DMT the spirit molecule" )

I'll let doctor Alexander answer, keep in mind that he is a neurosurgeon...

Isolated preservation of cortical regions might have explained some elements of my experience, but certainly not the overall odyssey of rich experiential tapestry. The severity of my meningitis and its refractoriness to therapy for a week should have eliminated all but the most rudimentary of conscious experiences: peripheral white blood cell [WBC] count over 27,000 per mm3, 31 percent bands with toxic granulations, CSF WBC count over 4,300 per mm3, CSF glucose down to 1.0 mg/dl (normally 60-80, may drop down to ~ 20 in severe meningitis), CSF protein 1,340 mg/dl, diffuse meningeal involvement and widespread blurring of the gray-white junction, diffuse edema, with associated brain abnormalities revealed on my enhanced CT scan, and neurological exams showing severe alterations in cortical function (from posturing to no response to noxious stimuli, florid papilledema, and dysfunction of extraocular motility [no doll’s eyes, pupils fixed], indicative of brainstem damage). Going from symptom onset to coma within 3 hours is a very dire prognostic sign, conferring 90% mortality at the very beginning, which only worsened over the week. No physician who knows anything about meningitis will just “blow off” the fact that I was deathly ill in every sense of the word, and that my neocortex was absolutely hammered. Anyone who simply concludes that “since I did so well I could not have been that sick” is begging the question, and knows nothing whatsoever about severe bacterial meningitis.

I invite the skeptical doctors to show me a case remotely similar to mine. My physicians, and their consultants at UVA, Bowman Gray-Wake Forest, Duke, Harvard, Stanford and beyond were astonished that I recovered.

In an effort to explain the “ultra-reality” of the experience, I examined this hypothesis: Was it possible that networks of inhibitory neurons might have been predominantly affected, allowing for unusually high levels of activity among the excitatory neuronal networks to generate the apparent “ultra-reality” of my experience? One would expect meningitis to preferentially disturb the superficial cortex, possibly leaving deeper layers partially functional. The computing unit of the neocortex is the six-layered “functional column,” each with a lateral diameter of 0.2–0.3 mm. There is significant interwiring laterally to immediately adjacent columns in response to modulatory control signals that originate largely from subcortical regions (the thalamus, basal ganglia, and brainstem). Each functional column has a component at the surface (layers 1–3), so that meningitis effectively disrupts the function of each column just by damaging the surface layers of the cortex. The anatomical distribution of inhibitory and excitatory cells, which have a fairly balanced distribution within the six layers, does not support this hypothesis. Diffuse meningitis over the brain’s surface effectively disables the entire neocortex due to this columnar architecture. Full-thickness destruction is unnecessary for total functional disruption. Given the prolonged course of my poor neurological function (seven days) and the severity of my infection, it is unlikely that even deeper layers of the cortex were still functioning in more than isolated pockets of small networks.

The thalamus, basal ganglia, and brainstem are deeper brain structures (“subcortical regions”) that some colleagues postulated might have contributed to the processing of such hyperreal experiences. In fact, all agreed that none of those structures could play any such role without having at least some regions of the neocortex still functional. All agreed in the end that such subcortical structures alone could not have handled the intense neural calculations required for such a richly interactive experiential tapestry.

There are 9 hypotheses discussed in an appendix of my book that I derived based on conversations with colleagues. None of them explained the hyper-reality in any brain-based fashion. -E. Alexander

-eg