John Hick argues that evidence from parapsychology "may not support the idea that there is life after death" (Kessler 342). This is true whether one is referring to mediumship and talking to the dead or near-death experiences. Hick believes that for life after death to exist, there would have to be a recreation of what he calls the psychophysical aspect of the human being. While mediumship or talking to the dead may be a reason to argue for life after death, Hick argues it does not support the idea in the sense that mediums may just be tapping into the unconscious connection between all individuals. In this sense, mediums may only be contacting the "spirits" of the dead through the conscious or unconscious minds and behavior of the living who knew the dead. Where near-death experiences and like phenomenon is concerned, there is no verifiable evidence or proof that such experiences are accurate or able to validate the existence of a realm of non-physical beings. Because of this Hick's argues these experiences are not necessarily evidence of life after death. I agree with Hick's logic refuting both of these kinds of parapsychology as able to prove life after death. I also support Hicks because despite thousands of years of recorded history of human beings, there has never been one documented and verifiable instance of someone returning from the grave or of someone visiting the non-physical realm of beings and coming back to document it.
Kessler, Gary E. Philosophy of Religion: Toward a Global Perspective. Wadsworth Publishing, 1998.
...