However, this aim is not achieved simply by adopting an idealist standpoint. Instead, I present arguments for the reason this idealist standpoint is necessary. First, I argue that the traditional way of assessing near-death experiences is often oversimplified and carries an unnecessary bias in favour of a materialist interpretation, which eventually sets it up for a failure to demonstrate that an afterlife state can exist. Once this materialist bias is examined, I make an attempt to level the playing field, so to speak, to see where this equal level can take the discussion.
Ultimately, I argue that it is best to fit all evidence and arguments into a theory that best explains near-death experiences; and, the theory that best explains these experiences is philosophical idealism. At the end, I provide examples of this theory and also a synthesized version of the best imaginable theory to show in what way(s) these idealist theories can explain near-death experiences and in what way(s) near-death experiences can be demonstrated to be veridical in nature....<<<Read More>>>...
