A near-death experience consistently raises concerns about death, about one's own life. People are confronted through this experience with this topic. It is thus clear that the question of the truth is requested: Is a near-death experience a sign that there is a life after death? As a result, how do you have to position the experience? What does it mean for society, for the individual and for one person?
Religious explanations: The most comprehensible attempt at explanation is therefore on the religious or ontological level. One thus deals with the degree to which the encounter corresponds to this "truth" or to what extent it can convey a thing about the "truth". It goes without saying that a Christian view interprets the experience in the sense: that the translation patterns could be as varied as the religions themselves. The most important point is what an experience can say about a life, and, above all, death, departure after death and whether.
Scientific, doubtful explanations: Science assumes that body and mind are inextricably united. It follows that religious explanations are excluded. It is supposed that there has to be logical explanations. It's often assumed, it is fairly natural reactions.
Value-free, impartial explanations (agnostic): Social science is not so interested in "truth" since it obviously cannot be seen with certainty - not with the knowledge and methods available today. The focus of social scientists is much more focused on the social importance of these near-death encounters and assesses the phenomenon in whether and how it's reported in the course of history and what significance these experiences are for individuals - for worried because of its immediate and indirect environment. "Neutrality" and "transparency" in study...
Therefore, the scientific debate is of fantastic importance, especially in the case of phenomena that have not yet been analyzed in detail, such as the near-death experience. The researcher's spiritual or anti-religious attitude may have a substantial influence on scenarios that can be interpreted differently. The researcher might not even be conscious of this influence and may not escape it. Even if it's agreed that a completely objective interpretation is excluded, the personal connection with topics such as faith and private conviction with regard to topics that can't be explained scientifically is particularly fundamental. This fact is evident in connection with the study.
The researcher certainty is always decisive for the end.
Because of this, the clear documentation of the research results is one of the decisive quality attributes: on which subject was requested that persons, what is the cultural background of the respondents, what would be the outside conditions of the interview, how, where and when the interviews were listed (e.g. questionnaires with predetermined decisions or face-to-face interviews). It's also an unforgettably a fact that every research project, every data collection is a snapshot. The data alone, if it isn't a part of a study, can't say what it'll look like after. It may make references to the past.
You might be interested these documents
about the Near Death Experiences(NDE) on AMAZON