Great article, cone again, and a special hat up for the level of respect and decorum taken throughout the article. This following part really underlined the openminded aspect of your article:

"I will be discussing this from a scientific and psychological standpoint but that is not to detract from those who may believe that these are actual examples of contact with the dead.

Whilst I will be describing them as hallucinatory experiences that is not to imply that I have any special understanding of the causation."

This is a subject very very close to me as I have been delving into the paranormal since I was born, in spite of myself... I have to admit that younger I wouldn't have been the sharpest of tool to know what may be what and wouldn't have been able to identify with an experience relating to a deceased person, especially if no imagery came through. The tools necessary to do so are much sharper now, luckily, and have had the chance of experiencing it twice. Mind you, though one can create a cut off for what is "reality" compared to what isn't, the legitimacy of it is extremely difficult to judge of without knowing how to access the same realm of experience. If two people had the same neurological predisposition and experiential baggage, maybe they'd have the same experience and be able to vouch for each other. From there, we'd need a third person to vouch for them and, if we weren't able to find the specific synchronous individual, the odds are that these two people would be deemed "abnormal" and maybe even a more debilitating label.

Corroboration of experiences that have a basis outside of conventional instrumental science doesn't get enough status for the validity of the experience. within the realm of the so-called social studies, there are mechanisms/methods that would allow for very decent studies of the matter though. The #1 problem becomes the one relating to the biases relating to the findings as well as what is implied in the conclusions from there. Rarely have I ever came across studies with an open end strictly conversing on the findings of what has been observed. You seem to have found a bit of a treasure trove in relation to that. Good for you good for us all! I greatly enjoy and value most of your discussion on the topic up above. Very well done, thank you.

From the stand point discussed up above, it is hard to know whether or not someone would trust another human being's judgement, as it is more often than otherwise the case, with such experiences. As you so well eloquently underlined, the cultural recognition or evaluation relating t such experiences could very well, and it would be my contention based on my experiences, that it would be the case. A general framework accompanying the study would have to be presented and understood first to be able to expose the potential relevance of such experiences within the frame of the social consciousness as well as within the mindset of each individual for that matter. Though the sharing of such experience is usually strictly forbidden within the cultures that have been practicing and and studying experiences of that nature, it might actually be a possibility, if one can gain trust, possibly after going through initiations and a longtime among the people...

If sincerely wish you good luck with this. Though we are now living in times where it seems apparent to you that the exposure of such experiences in the media might promote the ideas and concepts relating to such experiences, the war on consciousness is gaining in scale and, the heavy burdden left on the individuals exposing their views apparently countercurrent to the status quo as well as the apparently almighty mainstream of our Occidental white Englo-Saxon male culture, weigh very very heavily on one's sovereign soul-whenit is sovereign-, especially in times where that weight might simply not be welcomed.

Namaste :)