What do you think?
Rate this book
Why an Afterlife Obviously Exists: A Thought Experiment and Realer Than Real Near-Death Experiences
'Like a master attorney, Jens Amberts has marshaled an abundance of virtually irrefutable evidence in making the case for the thesis of his brilliant book, Why an Afterlife Obviously Exists. Basing his argument on four fundamental facts about near-death experiences (NDEs), Amberts has written a book that every serious student of NDEs, and especially skeptics, should be sure to read. On finishing it, I doubt any reader will not be convinced that death is not a dead end.' Kenneth Ring, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Psychology, University of Connecticut, author of Lessons from the Light
Why an Afterlife Obviously Exists is a philosophical argument demonstrating why the existence of an afterlife is beyond astronomically likely and hence empirically certain. It explains how we have every rational reason to think that people who have near-death experiences are not only telling the truth, but the book also argues that near-death experiencers are thoroughly justified in knowing that they visited the actual afterlife.
Why an Afterlife Obviously Exists is a philosophical argument demonstrating why the existence of an afterlife is beyond astronomically likely and hence empirically certain. It explains how we have every rational reason to think that people who have near-death experiences are not only telling the truth, but the book also argues that near-death experiencers are thoroughly justified in knowing that they visited the actual afterlife.
- GenresPhilosophyReligion
176 pages, Kindle Edition
Published April 29, 2022
23 people are currently reading
85 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
January 10, 2024
A Provocative title that fails to deliver
The thought experiment of the author is picturing a room whose contents can only be known by a randomly selected but representative group of people who are briefly allowed inside. The reports from these people are incredible/hard to believe but consistent so eventually it would be irrational to discard their accounts just by the sheer number of the reports. Based on extrapolating the results from a handful of studies/surveys conducted in the US and Germany on people experiencing Near Death Experiences (NDEs) the author believes that this sheer number has been met and hence it is irrational to disbelieve the accounts. Likewise the Author believes that because NDEs impact people so profoundly and are described by some experiencers as being unlike dreams or hallucinations and even realer than reality they cannot be illusions.
Where I see this as falling apart is that the Author fixates on reports of people who have NDEs and largely doesn't care to think of how his theory being true would impact other facts.
The main example being that even using the most generous estimates from the studies he mentions the overwhelming majority (~80%) of people who experience being close to death do not experience the afterlife features of NDEs. Which is completely contrary to what you would expect if his beliefs were true. Given the damage this would do to his thought experiment he simply does not consider these people to have had actual experience of near death and hence for the purposes of his thought experiment only allowed close to but not inside the room. Furthermore he believes that this is irrelevant because some people experience NDEs in some brushes with death and not others. Rather than justify this point he then proceeds to spend pages quoting poetic NDE experiences.
Finally the referencing is very sloppy an imprecise.
Quote of the book:
“At least right now it can be said, metaphorically speaking, that the academic philosophy world is sleeping so soundly, peacefully, and innocently in the starfish position on the topic of NDEs that you can practically hear the collective snoring even from outer space.”.
The thought experiment of the author is picturing a room whose contents can only be known by a randomly selected but representative group of people who are briefly allowed inside. The reports from these people are incredible/hard to believe but consistent so eventually it would be irrational to discard their accounts just by the sheer number of the reports. Based on extrapolating the results from a handful of studies/surveys conducted in the US and Germany on people experiencing Near Death Experiences (NDEs) the author believes that this sheer number has been met and hence it is irrational to disbelieve the accounts. Likewise the Author believes that because NDEs impact people so profoundly and are described by some experiencers as being unlike dreams or hallucinations and even realer than reality they cannot be illusions.
Where I see this as falling apart is that the Author fixates on reports of people who have NDEs and largely doesn't care to think of how his theory being true would impact other facts.
The main example being that even using the most generous estimates from the studies he mentions the overwhelming majority (~80%) of people who experience being close to death do not experience the afterlife features of NDEs. Which is completely contrary to what you would expect if his beliefs were true. Given the damage this would do to his thought experiment he simply does not consider these people to have had actual experience of near death and hence for the purposes of his thought experiment only allowed close to but not inside the room. Furthermore he believes that this is irrelevant because some people experience NDEs in some brushes with death and not others. Rather than justify this point he then proceeds to spend pages quoting poetic NDE experiences.
Finally the referencing is very sloppy an imprecise.
Quote of the book:
“At least right now it can be said, metaphorically speaking, that the academic philosophy world is sleeping so soundly, peacefully, and innocently in the starfish position on the topic of NDEs that you can practically hear the collective snoring even from outer space.”.
October 4, 2023
I found this book rather convincing. It is filled with testimonies of people who have had NDE's (Near-Death Experiences) and a persuasive thought experiment. Amberts argues that there is an epistemic significance behind NDE's and that philosophers should be more interested in NDE's as NDE'ers often describe their experiences as "realer than reality."
Acknowledging the existence of an afterlife makes mere materialism a difficult argument. It also highlights the problems behind physical explanations of consciousness like the "computational bi-product" argument, etc.
The book is fascinating, and I would highly recommend that anyone who is not a strict materialist read it.
There are countless incredible quotes but this is one of my favourites: "I saw that the love we express is often unbeknownst to us at the time... it felt as if we are living inside a grand game, which is perfectly designed to always give us another opportunity to get it right this time..."
Acknowledging the existence of an afterlife makes mere materialism a difficult argument. It also highlights the problems behind physical explanations of consciousness like the "computational bi-product" argument, etc.
The book is fascinating, and I would highly recommend that anyone who is not a strict materialist read it.
There are countless incredible quotes but this is one of my favourites: "I saw that the love we express is often unbeknownst to us at the time... it felt as if we are living inside a grand game, which is perfectly designed to always give us another opportunity to get it right this time..."
May 8, 2023
I came in ready to like the book. I believe in NDE and enjoy reading about it. But this was unbearably, painfully repetitive. If this were a 20-page article, it would have been already a repetitive article. The best parts were the quotes from other, more to-the-point authors.
May 25, 2023
A compelling exploration of near death experiences.
January 23, 2023
Premise - "We don't know there's an afterlife because if just one person came back from death then they'd tell us about it, right?"
Funnily enough, millions do.
NDEs, or near death experiences, are reported over decades by tens of millions of people dying in medical settings with doctors affirming bodily death. They are reported by all around the globe, in a true randomization data set from all cultures, educational background, faiths, or (non)materialistic worldviews.
What the vast majority experience on the other side is strikingly the same with parallel descriptions of emotions, events, meeting others, and living environments.
Not all experiences, however, are good: most are good, some are evil, and a few report being in a vaccum-void as a floating conscious mind. These can be further grouped beyond these categories and objectively scaled by intensity.
If we grant replicable observations as evidence then rationally we must accept that these NDE reports as true because the reported data set - as a whole - is statistically solid. Which means an afterlife exists. QED.
Funnily enough, millions do.
NDEs, or near death experiences, are reported over decades by tens of millions of people dying in medical settings with doctors affirming bodily death. They are reported by all around the globe, in a true randomization data set from all cultures, educational background, faiths, or (non)materialistic worldviews.
What the vast majority experience on the other side is strikingly the same with parallel descriptions of emotions, events, meeting others, and living environments.
Not all experiences, however, are good: most are good, some are evil, and a few report being in a vaccum-void as a floating conscious mind. These can be further grouped beyond these categories and objectively scaled by intensity.
If we grant replicable observations as evidence then rationally we must accept that these NDE reports as true because the reported data set - as a whole - is statistically solid. Which means an afterlife exists. QED.
July 14, 2025
I like people complaining about the writing in the reviews when it's because of knuckle-draggers like themselves that it needs to be written the way it is. Things need to be expressed in the tightest, repetitive philosophical detail for there to be even the slightest chance for the force of the argument presented to penetrate the hylic mind.
If it were written more casually, its inexhaustiveness of the excuses you'd make for disregarding the argument would cause you to do just that. On the other hand, exhaustiveness then causes you to be too mentally lazy to consider what is being said. But at least with the latter option, there is some chance that someone with enough IQ and dopamine will be able to be gotten to.
If it were written more casually, its inexhaustiveness of the excuses you'd make for disregarding the argument would cause you to do just that. On the other hand, exhaustiveness then causes you to be too mentally lazy to consider what is being said. But at least with the latter option, there is some chance that someone with enough IQ and dopamine will be able to be gotten to.
February 19, 2025
Very difficult to get through. I normally very much enjoy reading about near death experiences, and the insight into them. Although I appreciate what the author was trying to do, and enjoyed the actual quotes from the individuals who had the experiences, the author’s non-stop philosophical babbling was extremely off putting.
August 18, 2023
A short but intriguing title that offers a compelling argument for the existence of an afterlife. The book is philosophical at times but quite relatable.
Read
April 27, 2022I was provided with a complimentary copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. You can read my thoughts in this regard in bUneke Magazine or on their website blog @bUneke.com.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews