What happens to us when we die?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
Mauds
Posts: 8
Joined: May 1st, 2010, 8:54 pm

Post by Mauds »

Ideally, nothing. That we can perceive at least. Maybe our unconscious returns to the source, whatever that is. All I know, is if something does happen, I'm in for a surprise.
Hobo
Posts: 5
Joined: May 22nd, 2010, 1:10 am

Post by Hobo »

ignoranceizbliss wrote:Actually you can talk to the dead.
Why, of course you can talk to the dead! But they just won't respond to you. How could they...? They're are dead. Just like you can talk to a wooden chair...but "it" won't respond. :wink:
Meleagar
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 16th, 2009, 11:03 am
Contact:

Post by Meleagar »

Hobo wrote:
ignoranceizbliss wrote:Actually you can talk to the dead.
Why, of course you can talk to the dead! But they just won't respond to you. How could they...? They're are dead. Just like you can talk to a wooden chair...but "it" won't respond. :wink:
Scientific research has demonstrated for 150 years that we can talk to the dead.
Yahadreas
Posts: 30
Joined: June 18th, 2010, 9:14 am

Post by Yahadreas »

Meleagar wrote:Scientific research has demonstrated for 150 years that we can talk to the dead.
I'm pretty certain that reliable scientific research has demonstrated that mediumship is fraudulent and that mediums use a combination of cold reading and clever tricks.
Meleagar
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 16th, 2009, 11:03 am
Contact:

Post by Meleagar »

Yahadreas wrote:
Meleagar wrote:Scientific research has demonstrated for 150 years that we can talk to the dead.
I'm pretty certain that reliable scientific research has demonstrated that mediumship is fraudulent and that mediums use a combination of cold reading and clever tricks.
Please support that assertion by reference to any scientific research about the subject.
Yahadreas
Posts: 30
Joined: June 18th, 2010, 9:14 am

Post by Yahadreas »

Druckman, D. and Swets, J. A. eds. (1988). Enhancing Human Performance: Issues, Theories and Techniques. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.. ISBN 0-309-07465-7.

Moulton ST, Kosslyn SM (January 2008). "Using neuroimaging to resolve the psi debate". Journal of cognitive neuroscience 20 (1): 182–92. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20.1.182. PMID 18095790.

Cordón, Luis A. (2005). Popular psychology: an encyclopedia. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. ISBN 0-313-32457-3.

Hansen, George P.; Utts, Jessica; Markwick, Betty (1992-06). "Critique Of The Pear Remote-viewing Experiments". Journal of Parapsychology 56 (2): 97–113.

Carroll, Robert Todd (2005). "psi assumption". Skepdic(dot)com. The Skeptics Dictionary.
Meleagar
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 16th, 2009, 11:03 am
Contact:

Post by Meleagar »

Okay, let's try again.

Please support those references with quotes from the material (and document the pages) that support your above claim so I can have reasonable grounds for thinking that any effort I expend to research your citations will be time well-spent and not a wild goose chase or going down a rabbit hole.

The common means of supporting one's claim is to not only provide the citation, but a referenced quote that supports one's assertion (and links to the material if available on the internet).

Or, is it safe to say that you went to a "parapsychology" wiki site, scrolled down to the end and copied and pasted a few of their citations with no real knowledge of what those sources actually said, seeing as the last one doesn't appear to be more than an opinion column at a skeptic site, and none of them seem to address mediumship whatsoever?

I ask because I ran a google search on those citations, and they are all present at 3 wiki sites, each reference worded in exactly the same way they are in your post.

Thanks.

[Edit 6-21-10:] Hello? Yahadreas? Care to provide what I asked for here?
Yahadreas
Posts: 30
Joined: June 18th, 2010, 9:14 am

Post by Yahadreas »

Druckman, D. and Swets, J. A. eds. (1988). Enhancing Human Performance: Issues, Theories and Techniques. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.. ISBN 0-309-07465-7

books(dot)nap(dot)edu/openbook.php?record_id=1025&page=171

"Nothing approaching a scientific literature supports the claims for psychometric weaponry, psychic metal bending, out-of-body experiences, and other potential applications supported by many proponents."

(Not focused on mediumship specifically but addresses the issue of psychic powers in general).

------------

Moulton ST, Kosslyn SM (January 2008). "Using neuroimaging to resolve the psi debate". Journal of cognitive neuroscience 20 (1): 182–92. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20.1.182. PMID 18095790.

www(dot)ncbi(dot)nlm(dot)nih(dot)gov/pubmed/18095790

"Abstract Parapsychology is the scientific investigation of apparently paranormal mental phenomena (such as telepathy, i.e., "mind reading"), also known as psi. Despite widespread public belief in such phenomena and over 75 years of experimentation, there is no compelling evidence that psi exists. In the present study, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used in an effort to document the existence of psi. If psi exists, it occurs in the brain, and hence, assessing the brain directly should be more sensitive than using indirect behavioral methods (as have been used previously). To increase sensitivity, this experiment was designed to produce positive results if telepathy, clairvoyance (i.e., direct sensing of remote events), or precognition (i.e., knowing future events) exist. Moreover, the study included biologically or emotionally related participants (e.g., twins) and emotional stimuli in an effort to maximize experimental conditions that are purportedly conducive to psi. In spite of these characteristics of the study, psi stimuli and non-psi stimuli evoked indistinguishable neuronal responses-although differences in stimulus arousal values of the same stimuli had the expected effects on patterns of brain activation. These findings are the strongest evidence yet obtained against the existence of paranormal mental phenomena."

------------

Cordón, Luis A. (2005). Popular psychology: an encyclopedia. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. ISBN 0-313-32457-3.

books(dot)google(dot)co(dot)uk/books?id=Uy1gmwcAgg4C&printsec=frontcover&dq =Popular+psychology:+an+encyclopedia&source=bl&ots=XAgUvkk9XZ&sig=2JKqWxcFe lEONmIaj-3-9l1b1V8&hl=en&ei=mJYgTM_zN5aI0wTx07XqDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=r esult&resnum=9&ved=0CDUQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false

"The essential problem is that a large portion of the scientific community, including most research psychologists, regards parapsychology as a pseudoscience, due largely to its failure to move beyond null results in the way science usually does. Ordinarily, when experimental evidence fails repeatedly to support a hypothesis, that hypothesis is abandoned. Within parapsychology, however, more than a century of experimentation has failed even to conclusively demonstrate the mere existence of paranormal phenomenon, yet parapsychologists continue to pursue that elusive goal."

------------

Hansen, George P.; Utts, Jessica; Markwick, Betty (1992-06). "Critique Of The Pear Remote-viewing Experiments". Journal of Parapsychology 56 (2): 97–113

www(dot)tricksterbook(dot)com/ArticlesOnline/PEARCritique.htm

"The PEAR remote-viewing experiments depart from commonly accepted criteria for formal research in science. In fact, they are undoubtedly some of the poorest quality ESP experiments published in many years. The defects provide plausible alternative explanations. There do not appear to be any methods available for proper statistical evaluation of these experiments because of the way in which they were conducted."

(Critique of the PEAR remote-viewing experiments which supported the hypothesis of parapsychological phenomena).

------------

I cannot post (proper) links for a few more days, apparently.

Oh, and do you have any evidence to support your claim that "scientific research has demonstrated for 150 years that we can talk to the dead."?

After all, the burden of proof is on you. I don't have to prove a negative.
Meleagar
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 16th, 2009, 11:03 am
Contact:

Post by Meleagar »

Yahadreas wrote:Druckman, D. and Swets, J. A. eds. (1988). Enhancing Human Performance: Issues, Theories and Techniques. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.. ISBN 0-309-07465-7

books(dot)nap(dot)edu/openbook.php?record_id=1025&page=171

"Nothing approaching a scientific literature supports the claims for psychometric weaponry, psychic metal bending, out-of-body experiences, and other potential applications supported by many proponents."

(Not focused on mediumship specifically but addresses the issue of psychic powers in general).
You have presented no quote here that indicates this book says anything about the subject at hand, much less that it in any way contributes to your claim that: ".... reliable scientific research has demonstrated that mediumship is fraudulent and that mediums use a combination of cold reading and clever tricks."

------------
Moulton ST, Kosslyn SM (January 2008). "Using neuroimaging to resolve the psi debate". Journal of cognitive neuroscience 20 (1): 182–92. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20.1.182. PMID 18095790.

www(dot)ncbi(dot)nlm(dot)nih(dot)gov/pubmed/18095790

"Abstract Parapsychology is the scientific investigation of apparently paranormal mental phenomena (such as telepathy, i.e., "mind reading"), also known as psi. Despite widespread public belief in such phenomena and over 75 years of experimentation, there is no compelling evidence that psi exists. In the present study, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used in an effort to document the existence of psi. If psi exists, it occurs in the brain, and hence, assessing the brain directly should be more sensitive than using indirect behavioral methods (as have been used previously). To increase sensitivity, this experiment was designed to produce positive results if telepathy, clairvoyance (i.e., direct sensing of remote events), or precognition (i.e., knowing future events) exist. Moreover, the study included biologically or emotionally related participants (e.g., twins) and emotional stimuli in an effort to maximize experimental conditions that are purportedly conducive to psi. In spite of these characteristics of the study, psi stimuli and non-psi stimuli evoked indistinguishable neuronal responses-although differences in stimulus arousal values of the same stimuli had the expected effects on patterns of brain activation. These findings are the strongest evidence yet obtained against the existence of paranormal mental phenomena."
You have presented no quote here that indicates this book says anything about the subject at hand (mediumship), much less that it in any way contributes to your claim that: ".... reliable scientific research has demonstrated that mediumship is fraudulent and that mediums use a combination of cold reading and clever tricks."

------------
Cordón, Luis A. (2005). Popular psychology: an encyclopedia. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. ISBN 0-313-32457-3.

books(dot)google(dot)co(dot)uk/books?id=Uy1gmwcAgg4C&printsec=frontcover&dq =Popular+psychology:+an+encyclopedia&source=bl&ots=XAgUvkk9XZ&sig=2JKqWxcFe lEONmIaj-3-9l1b1V8&hl=en&ei=mJYgTM_zN5aI0wTx07XqDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=r esult&resnum=9&ved=0CDUQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false
The essential problem is that a large portion of the scientific community, including most research psychologists, regards parapsychology as a pseudoscience, due largely to its failure to move beyond null results in the way science usually does. Ordinarily, when experimental evidence fails repeatedly to support a hypothesis, that hypothesis is abandoned. Within parapsychology, however, more than a century of experimentation has failed even to conclusively demonstrate the mere existence of paranormal phenomenon, yet parapsychologists continue to pursue that elusive goal.
I ran a google search on your quotation above since even a corrected link from what you provided didn't take me anywhere but an error page; it appears to be lifted entirely from the same Wikipedia page article on parapsychology that you seem to have copied your links from, and not from the source you have ascribed it to.

As it is, it fails to provide any scientific research that has anything whatsoever to do with mediumship.

------------
Hansen, George P.; Utts, Jessica; Markwick, Betty (1992-06). "Critique Of The Pear Remote-viewing Experiments". Journal of Parapsychology 56 (2): 97–113

www(dot)tricksterbook(dot)com/ArticlesOnline/PEARCritique.htm

"The PEAR remote-viewing experiments depart from commonly accepted criteria for formal research in science. In fact, they are undoubtedly some of the poorest quality ESP experiments published in many years. The defects provide plausible alternative explanations. There do not appear to be any methods available for proper statistical evaluation of these experiments because of the way in which they were conducted."

(Critique of the PEAR remote-viewing experiments which supported the hypothesis of parapsychological phenomena).
This article is not about mediumship whatsoever, and entirely irrelevant in that it doesn't even gather and present evidence in contradiction to anything, it is just a critique about purported problems in research about psi events. It in no way supports your contention that: ".... reliable scientific research has demonstrated that mediumship is fraudulent and that mediums use a combination of cold reading and clever tricks."
Oh, and do you have any evidence to support your claim that "scientific research has demonstrated for 150 years that we can talk to the dead."?
Certainly. I posted some of it here in this thread, and also linked there to a clearing house for references to other such evidence.
After all, the burden of proof is on you. I don't have to prove a negative.
We both made positive claims that we have to support; I made the above claim, and you made the following positive claim: "I'm pretty certain that reliable scientific research has demonstrated that mediumship is fraudulent and that mediums use a combination of cold reading and clever tricks."

However, when asked for references to support your positive claim, you failed to produce a single piece of evidence, quote, or reference that said anything about mediumship whatsoever.
Yahadreas
Posts: 30
Joined: June 18th, 2010, 9:14 am

Post by Yahadreas »

If I were to make the positive claim that "unicorns(/dragons/fairies) do not exist", how am I supposed to prove this to be the case? All I can do is point to the lack of evidence which supports the claims that they exist. How can I prove that the American Government are not really alien lizards in disguise?. All I can do is point to the lack of evidence which supports the claims that they are.

It does not follow from me not being able to prove that unicorns do not exist that I ought to simply dispense with a belief either way; a lack of evidence in favour is sufficient evidence against. Not being able to find evidence to support the existence of unicorns is rational grounds for a belief in their non-existence. Simple as.

Although the articles I provided do not deal specifically with mediumship, they do deal with the extra-sensory faculties which mediums, psychics, clairvoyants, etc. claim to have. There has been no reliable evidence in favour of "psi", as it is called.

If it had been reliably shown that an afterlife exists -- that mediums can talk to departed souls -- then there would be as much challenge to mediumship as there is to evolution, i.e. very little. It is only because it is impossible to prove a negative that there is still believe in the afterlife (and Yahweh, and Allah, and witchcraft). If positives were proven, as is the case with gravity, the orbit of the Earth, and evolution, then a belief in mediumship (and the lizard-alien politicians) would be the common view.

The fact that Derren Brown, for example, can emulate mediums and psychics using cold reading and clever techniques shows that the same results achieved by claimed mediums and psychics can be explained by cold reading and clever techniques. It is much more reasonable to explain mediumship with reference to these tricks than to paranormal activity.

Only if they can achieve impossible results can we resort to impossible explanations.
Meleagar
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 16th, 2009, 11:03 am
Contact:

Post by Meleagar »

Yahadreas wrote:If I were to make the positive claim that "unicorns(/dragons/fairies) do not exist", how am I supposed to prove this to be the case? All I can do is point to the lack of evidence which supports the claims that they exist. How can I prove that the American Government are not really alien lizards in disguise?. All I can do is point to the lack of evidence which supports the claims that they are.
The obvious answer is to not make claims you cannot support.
It does not follow from me not being able to prove that unicorns do not exist that I ought to simply dispense with a belief either way; a lack of evidence in favour is sufficient evidence against.
No, it isn't. Lack of evidence for a thing is not evidence it doesn't exist.
Not being able to find evidence to support the existence of unicorns is rational grounds for a belief in their non-existence. Simple as.
No, it isn't. Lack of evidence that a thing exists is sufficient rational grounds for saying "I'm skeptical of their existence because I haven't seen any supportive evidence otherwise."

Mountain gorillas were once considered myths. So were giant squid. Lack of evidence for a thing is not rational grounds to assert that the thing doesn't exist; it is rational grounds to be neutrally skeptical.
Although the articles I provided do not deal specifically with mediumship, they do deal with the extra-sensory faculties which mediums, psychics, clairvoyants, etc. claim to have.
Hasty generalization. Nobody in this thread has claimed that mediumship and other psi claims are "the same thing"; you are equivocating the two because you apparently have zero support for your specific assertion about mediumship. The rational thing to do is to withdraw your assertion about mediumship and replace it with a supportable, better stated one that actually reflects your knowledge (or lack thereof) about the scientific evidence specifically regarding mediumship.
There has been no reliable evidence in favour of "psi", as it is called.
I doubt you have the capacity to support this categorical assertion. A better way to phrase it would be that you are not aware of any such evidence.
If it had been reliably shown that an afterlife exists -- that mediums can talk to departed souls -- then there would be as much challenge to mediumship as there is to evolution, i.e. very little.
You are now compounding categorical, unsupported assertion upon assertion, and you are making unsustainable broad claims using the vague term "evolution". Can you support your assertion that there is "very little" challenge to "evolution" - and please, further define what you mean by "evolution".

Otherwise, please stop making broad, categorical and vague assertions that you have no means to support.
It is only because it is impossible to prove a negative that there is still believe in the afterlife (and Yahweh, and Allah, and witchcraft). If positives were proven, as is the case with gravity, the orbit of the Earth, and evolution, then a belief in mediumship (and the lizard-alien politicians) would be the common view.
Appeal to popularity is not a rational argument; claiming that it is not the "common view" is irrelevent. Also, it is a erroneous to claim one cannot prove a negative; some negatives cannot be proven, but others certainly can. "There is no air in this cannister." is an example of a claim of non-existence that can be proven.

If one cannot reasonably support an assertion, whether positive or negative, they shouldn't make it, or once made and challenged, it should be withdrawn.
The fact that Derren Brown, for example, can emulate mediums and psychics using cold reading and clever techniques shows that the same results achieved by claimed mediums and psychics can be explained by cold reading and clever techniques.
Because someone can fraudulently emulate a thing doesn't mean that all such cases of the thing are fraudulent.
It is much more reasonable to explain mediumship with reference to these tricks than to paranormal activity.
Bald assertion. You have yet to demonstrate why it is "much more reasonable" except through appeals to popularity and a hasty generalization via an equivocation to psi phenomena in general.
Only if they can achieve impossible results can we resort to impossible explanations.
I don't even know what to make of this statement. You assume that psi is an "impossible explanation", which clearly reveals your a priori bias, then demand an "impossible result", which by definition is self-contradictory; if it occurs, then obviously it wasn't impossible, and so doesn't meet your criteria.
Aleph0
Posts: 2
Joined: June 22nd, 2010, 1:36 pm

Post by Aleph0 »

Our mind vanishes and our body decays!
User avatar
Interventizio
Posts: 32
Joined: April 15th, 2010, 12:40 pm
Contact:

Post by Interventizio »

When I die, I would like to be reborn and have another chance to live the same life I lived. I would make none of the mistakes I made and I would know that I wouldn't be given another chance (it would be asking to much, really), therefore I won't let any of the occasions that I had, escape.
Of course, when I say I would like to live the same life, I mean all the persons I cared for would have to be there with me once again, the others be damned!
Yahadreas
Posts: 30
Joined: June 18th, 2010, 9:14 am

Post by Yahadreas »

Meleagar, your arguments are good. I withdraw my assertion.
User avatar
Abiathar
Posts: 247
Joined: April 29th, 2008, 5:32 pm
Location: Angkor Wat.

Post by Abiathar »

What is consciousness? Physiology does not equate into the electrical impulses that create thought, though it does limit and constrain it along certain paths. Therefore, one can ascertain that Consciousness is infact those electrical impulses themselves. We see this by mental retardation, wherein a malformed portion of the physical brain limits the function of the consciousness, however does not eliminate any portion of said consciousness.

Thus, if we have any trust in Einstein or Newton, Electricity is an energy state, thereby implying that it is energy... in the most rudimentary of terms. With this we can assume the paradigm of the Conservation of Energy, wherein no energy may be removed or added to the universal system. Thereby the 'energy' that makes consciousness, the impulses if you will, are never removed from the system. This being said, the energy must move -somewhere-, as with Einstein's concept that energy never ceases in motion. Now, we spend our entire lives under the physical constraints of the human brain. This forms the energy into a particular state of being that, as seen with any form of electromagnetism or radioactivity, energy in an incumbent state retains that state long after its physical component is gone. For reference, see Chernobyl.

This tells us that the incumbent state of the electricity within the human brain will retain an... echo... of its physical constraints, even after said constraints are unbound, at least for a period before decaying into entropy. Being as the energy is the same in all human beings, we can assume that a properly tuned mind can receive, and send, this energy through its own neurological network... I.E. a Medium. Granted, most mediums are fictitious, but this does not negate the potentiality, and in fact high probability, of the existence of them.

After that, whether our energy degrades into entropy, is captured by the magnetic field and inserted into a newly developing human mind (A fetus activates electrically in the same number of days the Hindu and Buddhist believe that it takes to re-incarnate, for example), or is merely jettisoned into space by the highly charged solar wind, or the energy changes states completely, into a level of existence that we cannot see from our subjective viewpoint (I.E. Heaven, Hell, etc). Who knows?
"I aspire to say in ten sentences what one would say in a novel... and would not say" ~Nietzsche
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021