This time, they’re aiming—temporarily, of course—for the former. “Here we go,” says the technician. “I’m enabling and…I’m inducing.” The jolt makes Wes’s chest muscles contract violently, jerking his torso up off the table as though he’d been kicked from below. “We have VF,” says the technician, sounding all urgent and mission-control. “VF” stands for ventricular fibrillation. On the EKG monitor, Wes’s heartbeat dithers wanly. What’s going on in his mind right now? Is he beholding the bright light? Speeding through the tunnel? Attending an appliqué class? Wherever he is, it’s a brief visit; three seconds later the defibrillator is preparing to shock his heart back to lub-dub.
Twenty minutes later, Wes is being wheeled to the recovery room. Technically speaking, anyone who makes it to a recovery room can’t have been dead. By definition, death is a destination with no return ticket. Clinically dead is not dead dead. So how do we know the near-death experience isn’t a hallmark of dying, not death? What if several minutes down the line, the bright light dims and the euphoria fades and you’re just, well, dead? We don’t know, says Greyson. “It’s possible it’s like going to the Paris airport and thinking you’ve seen France.”
Greyson is an inestimably patient person in a field rife with inconclusive data and metaphysical ambiguities. I ask him what he thinks, in his heart of hearts. Does the personality survive death? Surely, after all these years, he has an opinion. “It wouldn’t surprise me at all if we come up with evidence that we do survive. I also wouldn’t be terribly surprised if we come up with evidence that we don’t.”
Sabom is less equivocal. I asked him, in an e-mail, whether he believed that the consciousness leaves the body during an NDE and is able to perceive things in an extrasensory manner. “Yes,” came the reply.
I asked van Lommel the same question, and got the same reply. “I am quite sure that it is not a hallucination or a confabulation,” he wrote. “I am convinced that consciousness can be experienced independently from the body, during the period of a nonfunctioning brain, with the possibility of nonsensory perception.”
Van Lommel mailed me a draft of a new article in which he presents a theory as to how this might be possible. He uses the analogy of radio or TV transmissions. All these channels, these different electromagnetic fields packed with information, are out there all the time. We can’t watch HBO if we’re already watching Bravo, but that doesn’t mean HBO’s broadcast ceases to exist. “Could our brain be compared to the TV set, which receives electromagnetic waves and transforms them into image and sound? When the function of the brain is lost, as in clinical death or brain death, memories and consciousness still exist, but the receptivity is lost, the connection is interrupted.” Then he went all Gerry Nahum on me. His paper stepped into quantum mechanics, to phase-space versus real-space, to nonlocality and fields of probability. Neuronal microtubules made an appearance. I had to set it down.
I can’t evaluate this sort of theorizing, because I have no background in quantum physics. A few months ago, I was corresponding with a Drexel University physicist named Len Finegold. I mentioned quantum-mechanics-based theories of consciousness. You can’t hear someone sigh through e-mail, but I heard it anyhow. “Please beware,” came his reply. “There are a lot of people who believe that just because we don’t have an explanation for something, it’s quantum mechanics.”
So I’m holding out for the guys on the ceiling. As soon as someone sees an image on Bruce Greyson’s computer, you can mark me down as a believer.
Last Words
SOMEWHERE THIS past year, I read that the most powerful influences upon your opinion about paranormal phenomena are your friends and family. The closer you are to the teller of a ghost story, the more likely you are to believe that the ghost in the story was a ghost, and not a raccoon or a temporal lobe seizure. Your beliefs are formed not by researchers or debunkers or television psychics, unless perhaps one of them is your mother or your good pal. Your beliefs are formed by your own experiences and those of your inner circle. And then validated by the researchers or the debunkers or the television psychics.
Now that you’ve spent 291 pages with me, I suppose I almost fall into the category of a friend, or anyway, someone that you know. And you might be wondering what it is, at this point, I believe. Has my year among the evidence-gatherers left me believing in anything I didn’t believe in a year ago? It has. It has left me believing something Bruce Greyson believes. I had asked him whether he believes that near-death experiences provide evidence of a life after death. He answered that what he believed was simply that they were evidence of something we can’t explain with our current knowledge. I guess I believe that not everything we humans encounter in our lives can be neatly and convincingly tucked away inside the orderly cabinetry of science. Certainly most things can—including the vast majority of what people ascribe to fate, ghosts, ESP, Jupiter rising—but not all. I believe in the possibility of something more—rather than in any existing something more (reincarnation, say, or dead folks who communicate through mediums). It’s not much, but it’s more than I believed a year ago.
Perhaps I’m confusing knowledge and belief. When I say I believe something, I mean I know it. But maybe belief is more subtle. A leaning, not a knowing. Is it possible to believe without knowing? While there are plenty of people who’ll tell you they know God exists, in the same way that they know that the earth is round and the sky is blue, there are also plenty of people, possibly even the majority of people who believe in God, who do not make such a claim. They believe without knowing. I remember once standing in the kitchen of my friend Tim, having a conversation about organic milk. I explained, in my usual overagitated, long-winded way, why I wasn’t yet convinced of the need to part with an extra dollar a quart. I didn’t believe in organic milk. Tim, who buys organic milk, listened to me for a while, and then he shrugged. “It’s just a decision,” he said. In other words, you don’t have to go out and read every published paper on antibiotics and bovine growth hormone, weighing those that speak for milk’s safety against those that warn of its dangers, before you can decide to believe in buying organic. You don’t need proof. You just need an inclination.
Perhaps I should believe in a hereafter, in a consciousness that zips through the air like a Simpsons rerun, simply because it’s more appealing—more fun and more hopeful—than not believing. The debunkers are probably right, but they’re no fun to visit a graveyard with. What the hell. I believe in ghosts.
Acknowledgments
PEOPLE ASSUME that authors are experts in the field about which they have chosen to write. Possibly most are. Possibly I’m the only one who begins a project from a state of near absolute ignorance. But I do, and it makes me an especially irksome presence in my sources’ lives. I ask naive, misguided questions and giggle at the wrong moments. I stay too long and grasp too little. The following names are listed in order of diminishing exasperation: Kirti Rawat, Bruce Greyson, Gerry Nahum, Gary Schwartz, Michael Persinger, Julie Beischel, Vic Tandy, Allison DuBois, Grant Sperry, and Karl Jansen, please accept my thanks for your patience and generosity and my apologies for the limits of my experience and the blind spots of my mindset.
For miscellaneous offerings of wisdom and arcane fact, a formal bow to Jürgen Altmann, Peter Copeland, Marco Falcioni, Jürgen Graaff, Lew Hollander, Jr., Nan Knight, Greg Laing, Anne LeVeque, His Excellency Pasquale Macchi, Peggy Pearl, Dean Radin, Eric Ravussin, Colleen Phelan, Julie Rousseau, Michael Sabom, Pim van Lommel, and Valerie Wheat. A tip of the hat to Kim Wong, Susan Grizzle, and Wes Lange, who got me into the operating room and out of a logistical pickle; to everyone at the Grotto; and to the ever-miraculous interlibrary loan staff of the San Francisco Public Library.
Lester, Ruby Jean, and Lloyd Blackwelder must have their own paragraph, because they not only helped me and trusted me with their story, they practically adopted me. If I could bake, I’d send you a persimmon pie.
I hesitate to thank Jay Mandel as my agent, becaus
e that is only one of the many hats I force him to wear on my behalf: reader, advisor, hand-holder, career counselor. You make it all easy. Similarly indispensable guidance and good humor came from Jill Bialosky, who has the gall to be as gifted an editor as she is a writer. The two of you have taken me on an incredible trip, for which I am deeply, unabashedly grateful.
A book is a collective undertaking, and this one, like the last, benefited tremendously from the talents of Bill Rusin and the rest of the Norton sales staff, Deirdre O’Dwyer, Erin Sinesky, and Jamie Keenan, whose covers make my heart fizz.
And then there is Ed, to whom every mushy cliché applies and none does justice.
Bibliography
Chapter 1: You Again
Angel, Leonard. “Empirical Evidence for Reincarnation? Examining Stevenson’s ‘Most Impressive’ Case.” Skeptical Inquirer 18: 481–87 (Fall 1994).
Bertholet, D. Alfred. The Transmigration of Souls. Translated by Rev. H.J. Chaytor. London and New York: Harper & Brothers, 1909.
Hopkins, Edward W., ed. The Ordinances of Manu. London: Trübner, 1884.
O’Connell, Rev. J. B. The Celebration of Mass: A Study of the Rubrics of the Roman Missal. Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing, 1944.
Stevenson, Ian. Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation, 2d ed. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1980.
——. Reincarnation and Biology. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1997.
Tucker, Jim B. “A Scale to Measure the Strength of Children’s Claims of Previous Lives: Methodology and Initial Findings.” Journal of Scientific Exploration 14 (4): 571–81.
Chapter 2: The Little Man Inside the Sperm, or Possibly the Big Toe
Ackerknecht, Erwin, and Henri V. Vallois. Franz Joseph Gall, Inventor of Phrenology, and His Collection. Wisconsin Studies in Medical History, No. 1. Translated by Claire St. Léon. Madison, WI: Department of History of Medicine, University of Wisconsin Medical School, 1956.
Bailey, Percival. “The Seat of the Soul.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, Summer 1959: 417–41.
Dobell, Clifford. Antony van Leeuwenhoek and His “Little Animals.” New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1932.
Ford, Norman. When Did I Begin? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Gall, Franz J. Sur les fonctions du cerveau et sur celles de chacune de ses parties… Paris: J. B. Baillière, 1825.
Grüsser, O. J. “On the ‘Seat of the Soul’: Cerebral Localization Theories in Mediaeval Times and Later.” In Brain—Perception—Cognition: Proceedings of the 18th Göttingen Neurobiology Conference, edited by Norbert Elsner and Gerhard Roth. New York and Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verlag, 1990.
Kaitaro, Timo. “La Peyronie and the Experimental Search for the Soul: Neuropsychological Methodology in the Eighteenth Century.” Cortex 32: 557–64 (1996).
La Peyronie, F. G. “Observations par lesquelles on tâche de découvrir la partie de cerveau où l’âme exerce ses fonctions.” In Mémoires de l’académie royale des sciences, 1741, pp. 199–218. Paris: Chez G. Martin.
Leeuwenhoek, Antoni van. The Select Works of Antony van Leeuwenhoek. Translated by Samuel Hoole. London: G. Sidney, 1800.
Peacock, Andrew. “The Relationship Between the Soul and the Brain.” In Historical Aspects of the Neurosciences, edited by F. Clifford Rose and W. F. Bynum. New York: Raven Press, 1982.
Pinto-Correia, Clara. The Ovary of Eve: Egg and Sperm and Preformation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.
Preuss, Julius. Julius Preuss’ Biblical and Talmudic Medicine. Translated and edited by Fred Rosner. New York: Sanhedrin Press, 1978.
Reichman, Edward, and Fred Rosner. “The Bone Called Luz.” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 51: 52–65.
Ruestow, E. G. “Leeuwenhoek’s Perception of the Spermatozoa.” Journal of the History of Biology 16: 185–24.
Schierbeek, A. Measuring the Invisible World: The Life and Works of Antoni van Leeuwenhoek. London and New York: Abelard-Schuman, 1959.
Terai, Takekazu. “Detection of Flatus Using a Portable Hydrogen Gas Analyzer.” Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 15: Letter to the Editor (November 2003).
Zimmer, Carl. Soul Made Flesh. New York: Free Press, 2004.
Chapter 3: How to Weigh a Soul
Carpenter, Donald Gilbert. Physically Weighing the Soul. Online: www.1stbooks.com, 1998.
Clarke, John Henry. A Dictionary of Practical Materia Medica. London: Homeopathic Publishing Company, 1900-02.
Coulton, G. G. From St. Francis to Dante: Translations From the Chronicle of the Franciscan Salimbene (1221–1288), 2d ed. New York: Russell and Russell, 1968.
Haverhill Evening Gazette. “Weight of a Soul.” 11 March 1907.
Hollander, Lewis E., Jr. “Unexplained Weight Gain Transients at the Moment of Death.” Journal of Scientific Exploration 15 (4): 495–500.
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research. Vol. 1, No. V (May 1907): Correspondence pages, pp. 263–83.
Kleiber, Max. The Fire of Life: An Introduction to Animal Energetics. Huntington, NY: Robert E. Krieger, 1975.
Macdougall, Duncan. “Hypothesis Concerning Soul Substance Together with Experimental Evidence of the Existence of Such Substance.” American Medicine New Series Vol. II (4): 240–43 (April 1907).
New York Times. “Soul Has Weight, Physician Thinks.” 11 March 1907, p. 5.
Sanctorius, Santorio. De statica medicina: being the aphorisms of Sanctorius, translated into English. Third edition, edited by John Quincy. London: W. and J. Newton, 1723.
Sunday Post (Boston). “Existence of ‘Soul’ Tested by Doctors.” 10 March 1907.
Twining, H. LaV. The Physical Theory of the Soul. Westgate, CA: Published by the author, 1915.
Chapter 4: The Vienna Sausage Affair
Carrington, Hereward. Laboratory Investigations into Psychic Phenomena. New York: Arno Press, 1975.
——. The Story of Psychic Science. London: Rider, 1930.
Eisenberg, Henry. Radiology: An Illustrated History. St. Louis, MO: Mosby-Year Book, 1992.
Krauss, Rolf. Beyond Light and Shadow: The Role of Photography in Certain Paranormal Phenomena. Translated by Timothy Bill and John Gledhill. Munich: Nazraeli Press, 1992.
New York Times. “As To Picturing the Soul.” 24 July 1911, p. 1.
Russ, Charles. “An Instrument Which Is Set in Motion by Vision.” Lancet, 30 July 1921, pp. 222–24.
Sunday Post (Boston). “Heaven Is Perhaps Just Outside Earth.” 21 May 1914.
Chapter 5: Hard to Swallow
Bird, J. Malcolm. “Our Next Psychic: A Preliminary Account of the Case that Now Comes Before Us, as It Appears to the Naked Eye.” Scientific American, July 1924, p. 28.
Bondeson, Jan. A Cabinet of Medical Curiosities. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.
Brockbank, E. M. “Merycism or Rumination in Man.” British Medical Journal, 23 February 1907, pp. 421–27.
Crawford, W. J. Experiments in Psychical Science. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1919.
——. The Psychic Structures at the Goligher Circle. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1921.
Einhorn, Max. “Rumination in Man.” Medical Record, 17 May 1890, pp. 554–58.
Fournier d’Albe, E. E. The Goligher Circle (May to August, 1921), With an Appendix Containing Extracts from the Correspondence of the Late W. J. Crawford, D. Sc. And Others. London: John M. Watkins, 1922.
Free, E. E. “Our Psychic Investigation: Preliminary Committee Opinions on the ‘Margery’ Case.” Scientific American, November 1924, p. 304.
Gaskill, Malcolm. Hellish Nell. London: Fourth Estate, 2001.
Houdini, Harry. A Magician Among the Spirits. New York: Arno Press, 1972.
Jastrow, Joseph. “Ectoplasm, Myth or Key to the Unknown?” New York Times, 30 July 1922, p. 1.
New York Times. “‘Ectoplasm’ Prints Called Lung Tissue.” 28 February 1926, p. 22.
New York Times. “Links Alchemists with Spiritualism.” 14 April 1922, p. 14.
New York Times.
“Man Bites a Ghost and Upsets Seance.” 10 November 1923, p. 15.
New York Times. “Sorbonne Scientists Find No Ectoplasm After Experiments in Fifteen Seances.” 8 July 1922, p. 1.
Popular Science Monthly. “Weighing Ghosts and Photographing Phantoms: How Three European Scientists Brought the ‘Spirit World’ into the Laboratory.” September 1921, pp. 15–16.
Price, Harry. Regurgitation and the Duncan Mediumship. London: National Laboratory of Psychical Research, 1931.
Schrenck-Notzing, Albert von. Phenomena of Materialization. Reprint of 1920 ed., in the series Perspectives in Psychical Research. New York: Arno Press, 1975.
Wilson, William. “Rumination in Man.” Letter to the editor in Lancet, 1839–40, pp. 671–72.
Chapter 6: The Large Claims of the Medium