Korpo

Recently I've come to believe even more that the NDE indeed poses one of the biggest challenges to a materialist worldview. As soon as we start digging deeper into it, several assumptions about the evolution of man come undone (or at least I would say so).

If we look at the NDE we can define it as a complex behavior. Similarities can be observed in varying groups of people, but it is invariably a detailed experience, sometimes even recalled as "more real." It follows a plot (which I don't think I have to establish here). And it is not random, as it seems to be reproducible over a varied population (and even throughout history).

Here's the catch: Complex behaviors are transmitted (genetically) by evolutionary selection. NDE as a behavior cannot have been transmitted in such a way (with one exception, see below).

Generally I would say the theory of evolution postulates that behaviors and faculties of an organism are transmitted during procreation. New behaviors and faculties arise through mutation. I will assume that NDE must be such a behavior since it occurs involuntarily, so I would assume it to be part of the dying process.

Now there's a problem: Dying invariably occurs after procreation (modern procreation methods aside). The mechanisms of selection cannot be at work here. Selection can work in one of two ways:

The general viability of an organism is one factor. The organism may never grow to maturity due to problems induced by its mutations. It would then not procreate and its mutations would be lost.

The ability to procreate is another. This includes the ability to procreate at all, but goes beyond that. In complex lifeforms like humans there is also a selection of mates, and many factors play into this selection. A mutation that influences the ability to attract a mate negatively might get lost even if it does not affect viability.

Now here's the catch: The way we die seems not to affect either. We don't chose our mates according to it nor does it seem to affect our general viability.

This poses a problem: Here we have a complex behavior that is not affected by evolutionary mechanisms as we know it. It is too complex to have evolved at random. And it gets worse...

To be present in most humans it would also need not to be affected by various changes. Let's assume it is spread like that - it has been observed in historical cases, it has been observed in a varied population, and to top it off it has been repeatedly observed even though the conditions for it are rare - the experience of escaping death narrowly.

We might lack statistical data to clarify all of this, but if the phenomenon is observable in many people and if it is not - according to our scientific understanding of evolution - subject to selection, it seems not to vary regardless. That poses a big problem if you think about it. It conflicts with our understanding how traits are transmitted through our genes.

Of course an alternative explanation is also possible: An organism might not be viable at all without having this ability. This would ultimately select this ability into everyone alive. This would resolve all of the contradictions mentioned above.

Neither of these alternatives is very comfortable for our hypothetical materialist scientist, however. (Though the later one leaves our understanding of how biological evolution works intact.)