Science can't answer these questions

I guess it depends on what people consider to be science.
Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
The study of near-death-experiences is scientific.
Science is not religion.
So are past & between life regressions, and even channelings.
Science is not a seance nor a religion.
There is a lot of information in all of the research surrounding these things that addresses all of the questions in the OP. I wouldn't say it's all final & solved, but there is strong evidence for each (imo).
Science is not evidence.
 
Have you looked into that area of study?

There is some remarkable stuff. Because the mechanics of it are outside the physical plane, I'm not sure a scientist could truly confirm it. But a lot of science is like that (i.e. things like the Big Bang theory).

Science is not confirmations. Science is not religion. The Theory of the Big Bang is a religion.
 
I don't deny there are legitimate scientific questions about NDEs. But even if we learned more about NDEs, wouldn't it just be interesting information, rather than a real answer to whether there is meaning to life, and the question of how to choose to live life?

Science is not a religion.
 
If we describe something as unethical or immoral, it's generally some kind of event or action we are referring to. An adult verbally or physically abusing a child, for example. There's the actual act of abuse and there is the impact that abuse has on the victim. That impact is based on the conscious experience of the person being abused. That conscious experience is based on activity in the brain.

If we had a more thorough understanding of brain functionality, to be able to see how verbal or physical abuse impacts the victim, we would have an objective, scientific basis for saying that abuse, even verbal, is immoral or unethical.

Science is not morals.
Science is not ethics.
 
Back
Top