Near-death experiences between science and prejudice

Science exists to refute dogmas; nevertheless,dogmas may be introduced when undemonstrated scientific axioms lead us to reject facts incompatible with them. several studies have proposed psychobiological interpretations of near-death experiences (ndes),claiming that ndes are a mere byproduct of brain functions gone awry; however,relevant facts incompatible with the ruling physicalist and reductionist stance have been often neglected. the awkward transcendent look of ndes has deep epistemological implications,which call for: (a) keeping a rigorously neutral position,neither accepting nor refusing anything a priori; and (b) distinguishing facts from speculations and fallacies. most available psychobiological interpretations remain so far speculations to be demonstrated,while brain disorders and/or drug administration in critical patients yield a well-known delirium in intensive care and anesthesia,the phenomenology of which is different from ndes. facts can be only true or false,never paranormal. in this sense,they cannot be refused a priori even when they appear implausible with respect to our current knowledge: any other stance implies the risk of turning knowledge into dogma and the adopted paradigm into a sort of theology. © 2012 faccoand agrillo.