This is an interview with author Piero Calvi-Parisetti, MD, about the evidence for the afterlife, survival of consciousness and psi research. I thank Piero for accepting this interview. Enjoy.1-Piero, tells us something about your background.
I call myself an “Italian from Glasgow”, as this reflects both my origins and where I feel I belong. To complicate matters even further, I have been living for over a decade in Geneva, Switzerland. I am a medical doctor, specialising in public health and disaster management. For many years I worked for the International Red Cross and for the United Nations, and then I moved to a late academic career. I now earn my living teaching disaster risk reduction to graduate and PhD students at two major universities.
2-Why did you get interested in psi and afterlife research?
I consider myself man of science, and that’s not only because of my background but also, and probably especially, because of my interests. In fact, ever since I was a kid, much of my time for reading was dedicated to popular – and at times not so popular – science books. You will understand, then, the contempt I had for most of my life for all things called “paranormal”.
My encounter with psychical research arrived a few years ago, after my wife happened to tell me about a spooky experience she had when she in her late teens. Normally, I would have dismissed that with my usual contempt, but I could tell that episode had made an impression on her. I could see that, after all these years, she was still somewhat perturbed. The idea came to me, then, to look around and see if anything “serious” had been written on the subject, anything that would rank above my – excuse my French – “bullshit threshold”.
As soon as I started looking I found quite a few surprisingly interesting publications. My first choice fell upon a massive book written by British psychology professor with extraordinary credentials. Reading those 500 pages was nothing less than a shock. I simply could not believe what I was reading. For one hundred and fifty years, inexplicable paranormal phenomena had been investigated not through the laughable mock-up of science we sometimes see on the Discovery Channel, but in exquisite details and by world-class scientists. And the quantity, the sheer quantity of carefully documented anecdotal evidence was simply staggering. Those initial 500 pages were followed by some other 25,000, until I decided to write my own book.
3-Have you had any personal, first-hand experience with mediums, psychics or any kind of phenomenon suggestive of afterlife and psi?
No, alas, unfortunately not. A few people I am very close to, and whom I absolutely trust, have, though.
4-What did motive you to write your excellent introductory book on the afterlife entitled "21 days into the afterlife"?
The basic desire to be of help to others. In particular, what really prompted me to get down to writing were the ground-breaking studies carried out since the early 1970’s on the psychological and behavioural transformations that people who had a Near Death Experience consistently show. Appreciation for life, self-acceptance, concern for others, anticompetitiveness, no fear of death are all very desirable things in one’s life. What interested me, especially, was learning that some of the psychological and behavioural changes become manifest also in people who have just read about NDEs and dedicated some time to their study – the greater the study effort, the greater the changes. This, then, was my aim with the book. If learning about NDEs can have such effects, learning that there is evidence from at least another dozen fields of investigation that is completely consistent with the indications emerging from NDE research can have an even stronger effect.
5-In your opinion, which is the most convincing single piece of evidence for survival of consciousness?
It is really difficult for me to pick one. If I really had to, it would probably be the Scole experiment. That is a wide set of pieces of evidence, though. If I were to really chose one piece, just the one, then I would let my heart do the judging, not my mind. There are things that speak to me as a person, as a human being, much more than as a man of science. Look up on YouTube, for example, the video in which medium Gordon Smith does a stage demonstration in the US. You can tell, because the video is in black and white, and he’s wearing a kilt. Or the other video, in which he talks to a couple of bereaved parents. Every time I watch those, my eyes well with tears. All the warmth, the compassion, quite apart from the incredibly accurate information… Then I feel that I don’t really need to know anything else.
6-Do you think that contemporary medium David Thompson is a real materialization medium?
Honestly, I don’t know enough to be able to tell with confidence. From what I’ve read, he seems to be able to manifest some impressive physical phenomena. As to the actual materialisations, though, I don’t feel comfortable expressing an opinion.
7- According to your research, the phenomena of "ghosts" or "apparitions" is a real one? Do ghosts exist?
Quite apart from what I’ve read, which seems clearly to indicate that apparitions are an actual phenomenon, I have at least three people whom I know well and trust beyond any doubt who have indeed seen a ghost.
8-Do you think the evidence for reincarnation is good?
All in all, extraordinary. Here again, like in most areas of psychical research, it’s not that much a single “proof” or body of research (although there are some pretty good ones out there), but rather the cumulative weight of the evidence. Different fields of investigation, all producing consistent data. Difficult to refute, I think. There is a perhaps lesser known book that does a marvellous job of bring all that together: Mystery of Reincarnation, by J. Allan Danelek.
9-Do you think that if reincarnation were proved to exist, it would refute Christianity?
You ask me a difficult question here… It’s difficult for me to answer without coming across as disrespectful for one of the great spiritual traditions of mankind – something I absolutely don’t want to do. The problem, you see, is that I see so many things in life that seem to refute Christianity, let alone reincarnation… Also, it depends what Christianity we’re talking about. The Christianity of the Old Testament appears to me quite different from the one of the Gospels. It is well known, for instance, that early Christians such as the Gnostics did believe in reincarnation, and the idea was then dropped, and in fact actively suppressed by the Church. I suspect that if I asked three different Christian people today what exactly happens when one dies, I would get three quite different answers. In contrast, the picture of the afterlife that we can draw from spirit communicators or hypnotic regressions is so much simpler, clearer, consistent across ages, cultures and religions…
10-As a medical doctor, do you think the evidence for the afterlife conflicts with what is known in neurology, neuroscience and physiological psychology?
On the very contrary, I believe that what materialist science says about the mind (“a byproduct of brain”) is in conflict with what is known in neuroscience. Evidence for the afterlife is just one of the many elements that point to a mind existing outside the physical brain. The only way to stick to the idea that the mind is produced by the brain is to ignore a colossal quantity of evidence from PSI research, out of body and near-death experience and afterlife communication. But ignoring evidence is not good science. Science is not a fixed set of ideas – that is more akin to religion. Science is a method, and the method says “follow the evidence, follow the data”. Nobody, no materialist scientist can propose a detailed, demonstrable model of how consciousness is produced by the physical brain (or, for what it matters, how and where memory is stored in the brain…), but still the prevailing mantra is that consciousness is an “epiphenomenon” of matter. They don’t have a theory and they ignore (or deliberately try to suppress) evidence that points to an alternative, nonmaterialist explanation.
11-Also as a physician, do you think some diseases and mental/emotional disorders (e.g. some congenital diseases or certain phobias) could be caused by factors operating in a previous life?
Well, what I know for sure is that regression therapy does work for a range of psychological ailments. This is well known, and undisputed even by mainstream science. Obviously, then, explanations differ on why it works. Furthermore, the evidence produced by Ian Stevenson on birth defects linked to memories of a previous life appears quite compelling to me. Intuitively, I also find factors operating in a previous life a possible explanation not only for problems in the current life, but also for special talents. Seeing how certain talents – music, for instance – are unevenly distributed in the population makes me think…
12-Some people argue that the evidence of the so-called split-brain patients show that consciousness is strongly dependent on the brain, and therefore that survival of consciousness is arguably impossible on that evidence. What do you think of this argument?
The people you are referring to, alas, are ignorant. They either don’t know, or refuse to acknowledge that the link consciousness-brain is actually very shallow. Let me refer to an example I use in my book. For many years now, it has been very fashionable in neuroscience to show the link between the activity of certain specific groups of neurons in the brain with one psychological function or another. Based on this association, materialist neuroscientists are adamant that consciousness is nothing but the activity of the brain. Now, let’s look at what happens inside your radio when you listen to the morning news. You hear the voice of the anchor, and if you use a tester you can easily show how the current flowing in certain transistors matches quite perfectly what you hear on the speaker. Does this mean that the broadcast is generated inside the radio? Of course not. We all know that the broadcast exists outside the receiver, and the transistors are instrumental in making it audible. What is shown, by neuroscience and by your tester, is an associative link, not a causation link. If you take into account the masses of evidence we all know about, the most economical, elegant, clean explanation is that consciousness exists outside the brain as a much wider and deeper field, and that human brain acts as a receiver. In fact, a very selective receiver, one which filters out most of what is out there to give raise to what we experience as human consciousness, much like a radio receiver, which filters out the entire electromagnetic spectrum except from the frequency you’re interested in, which gives raise to what we experience as the morning news.
13-Do you think that contemporary physics is compatible with the survival of consciousness?
There are at least three different theoretical models which attempt to explain at which level of the brain’s anatomy and physiology the interaction between the “field” of consciousness and the physical brain occurs. All these models turn around quantum interactions, since consciousness at large is viewed as an essentially quantum-mechanic process. These models, proposed by some of the brightest scientific minds on the planet (including Wolf prize winner mathematical physicist Roger Penrose), are indeed very interesting, and would explain a lot, including the evidence we have for survival. For the moment, however, they remain theories.
14-Do you think that survival of consciousness is compatible with contemporary evolutionary theory?
Evolution, which has to do with the survival of the body, may explain why the brain has evolved as such a narrowly-filtered receiver. Under normal circumstances, the filter “lets through” only the components of consciousness which are relevant for life and survival in the material world. Then, under special circumstances such as NDE, OBE and deathbed visions, the filter gets wider and humans experience other bits of reality, which are less or not at all relevant for life and survival.
15-Do you think the evidence for an afterlife provides independent evidence for God's existence?
No.
16-Do you think the super-ESP (or super-PSI) hypothesis is a good alternative to explain (at least some of) the phenomena suggestive of an afterlife?
No, and for two reasons. First, the PSI effects that have been repeatedly shown in laboratory conditions range from small to very small – nothing like the enormous effects that we sometimes see in mental and physical mediumship. Second, and in particular concerning the acquisition of precise information by the medium which is not known by anybody present, the super-ESP hypothesis has been discussed in exquisite details by a number of investigators, and in many cases simply it does not stand up
17-According to your research, can you summarize what happens when we die?
Your mind, your personality, your consciousness, your memories, all that you identify with yourself, with your feeling of being alive, is not dependent on your functioning physical brain. When your brain will die, all this will continue to exist. It will still be you, and it will feel exactly like you, only without a physical body. You have gone through this transition from the physical to the spiritual world many times already, as this is not your first incarnation. After the death of your physical body, you will spend a certain amount of time in the various levels of the spirit world, and then you will probably, but not necessarily, decide to incarnate again. In the long term, all this pans out as a project for your own evolution and development. Life, in the material and spiritual worlds, has a meaning and a purpose.
18-What books would you like to recommend about the scientific evidence for survival of consciousness and psi phenomena in general?
If one was to read one and only one book on survival, Is There an Afterlife? by the late Professor David Fontana is the absolute must. On PSI phenomena, I would suggest the very convincing The Conscious Universe by Dean Radin, alongside The Parapsychology Revolution by Robert Schoch. Let me point again to a lesser known but excellent book on reincarnation: Mystery of Reincarnation, by J. Allan Danelek. Lastly, an absolutely extraordinary book that everybody interested in these matters should read is Science and the Near Death Experience by Chris Carter. It is admittedly a bit science- and philosophy-heavy, but it does a marvellous job at explaining how the materialist view of consciousness is incompatible with the irrefutable evidence we have from NDEs and other fields of research. I would also advise the interested reader to become a member of the Society for Psychical Research, whose Journal, Proceedings and Paranormal Review are a goldmine of the best information available in the field.
19-Would you like to add something else to end the interview?
Briefly, I would like to talk about my next project. Towards the end of last year, I had the distinct feeling that I had studied, researched and reflected enough. Although I continue to keenly follow the developments in the field of psychical research, particularly concerning survival, I must admit that I am now completely and thoroughly “sold” on the idea. I do not look for “proof” anymore, and I am not really interested in trying to convince the skeptics. Instead, I want to turn my efforts even more decisively towards helping people who are in difficult situations. In particular, I want to try to be of help to those who are awaiting a premature death, and to their families, loved ones and caregivers. I believe that a lot of the fear, the anguish, the desperation could be lifted if these people knew what evidence is available for survival, and what the evidence points to.
So, I am working at my next book, which will be at the same time a print book and an audio book – a sort of manual, or guidebook for the dying. Not something for the intellectually curious, like my first book, but an actual tool to prepare for a peaceful, successful transition. In this respect, I would warmly welcome comments, suggestions and even collaboration on the part of interested readers of Subversive Thinking. Particularly, I am keen on advice on how to give such a resource adequate visibility, for instance with the many volunteer associations which assist terminal patients. Please contact me at piero@openmindsite.com.
Links of interest:
-Piero's website.
-Piero's online book on the afterlife.
0 comments:
Post a Comment