You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Can Negative Behaviors Lead To Hellish Experiences?

The following conversation was started by David Sunfellow on the Near-Death Experience Facebook page. Excerpts from this conversation appear here because they were too long to post on Facebook and because they may be of interest to people who weren’t aware of the original Facebook conversation.

………….

Amphianda Etta Louise Baskett writes:

I am just really not at all convinced that “bad” deeds or thinking cause hellish NDEs. I think they happen far more randomly, and the only study I’ve ever seen states that this IS IN FACT THE CASE. And Ive read hundreds of NDEs myself, and it seemed to me that there was no correlation. And the folks at IANDS also seem to be of the same mind as I am on this issue, otherwise they would have updated their website with new studies and information. Sure, once in a while a person has a hellish NDE and they say they believe they deserved it. But that’s really RARE. So… If I am correct on this… as the studies I’ve seen do strongly imply I am correct, then it makes more sense for us to talk about that fact… The lack or correlation should be highlighted and discussed far more than telling folks they may have visit HELL if they think judgmental thoughts, or focus on materialistic living. Because if that’s NOT the truth, we are doing people a disservice by spreading very false ideas. What studies on this topic have you seen David? I am not challenging you, I really want to see them so that I can know more.

………….

David Sunfellow responds:

OK, Amphianda, let’s examine this topic more carefully. I’ll begin by making a few important observations:

“Moody himself claimed never to have heard an account featuring the archetypal hell (1979); and in eight studies since then, some of them formative, researchers reported no unpleasant or distressing experiences of any kind.”

That’s an amazing statement. NO unpleasant or distressing experiences OF ANY KIND were reported in the early years of NDE research. Why? Bush suggests the reason for negative NDEs being unreported was due to fear, shame, social stigma, experiencers not wanting to burden others with their horrific tales, and the trauma associated with reliving these upsetting stories by retelling them.

It’s important to mention this because even now, after 40 years of NDE research, people — both experiencers and researchers — are still being attacked, shamed, and shunned if they dare to discuss this topic. Since attacking others is one of the main ways that humans avoid dealing with their own darkness, I would amplify Bush’s reasons to include the idea that people are loathe to share negative NDEs because doing so triggers intense, irrational, shadow-driven reactions in others.

What are shadow issues? Check out this page on NHNE’s Formula website:

As more and more NDE stories were reported, and experiencers of all stripes were able to share their experiences with less fear of being ignored, ridiculed, or institutionalized, hellish NDEs finally began appearing on the radar of researchers. Here’s a quote from Ken R. Vincent, Ed.D., that describes how the number of reported distressing experiences has steadily risen over the years:

“To date, research has shown that negative STEs (spiritually transformative experiences) are far less common than positive ones. In his initial study of 3,000 cases of STEs sent to the Religious Experience Research Centre (RERC) (formerly at Oxford; now at University of Wales Lampeter), Sir Alister Hardy (1979, p.28) found 4% negative. Somewhat later, using 4,000 cases at the RERC, Merete Jakobsen (1999, p. iv) also found 4% negative experiences. Recently, Zinzhong Yao and Paul Badham (2007, pp. 9,45-46) of the RERC found in studying 3,196 Chinese that 56.7% had religious experiences, but only 8.5% of them were negative. They compared this to a 1987 British survey which found 12% negative experiences (Yao & Badham 2007, p. 185). Regarding NDEs, in a monumental analysis of over 21 studies, Nancy Evans Bush (2006) found 17.2% of them to be negative. Also, most researchers of STEs feel that the numbers are under-reported because of the stigma sometimes associated with having a negative STE.”

Please notice that the IANDS website indicates that distressing NDEs range from 1 percent to 15 percent of all NDEs. They get their numbers from a 2001 study, not the 2006 study that is mentioned in the above quote that found 17 percent of NDEs to be negative, or the 20 percent estimate that appears in Bush’s 2012 book.

In other words, the data on the IANDS website on this topic is dated and inaccurate.

Three

In the same way that NDE researchers have avoided talking about a personal God, most NDE researchers have also danced around the idea that bad behavior can and does produce negative (hellish) experiences.

“This book is presenting evidence for the reality of God and the afterlife from research that is new and pioneering. There are virtually no prior scholarly studies that explored what will be presented in this book.”

“When I first realized that over 40 percent of near-death experiencers were aware of the existence of God or a supreme being during their NDE, I was shocked. This was an extraordinary finding! No prior NDE study had asked so many NDErs directly about encountering God in their NDEs, and no other study had reported such high numbers of NDErs being aware of God. To put this statistic in context, the percentage of NDErs who were aware of God or a supreme being during their NDE is greater than the percentage of NDErs reporting a tunnel, encountering deceased loved ones, or a having a life review. This new information tells us one element of NDEs happens more often than any of these other NDE elements: awareness of the existence of God.”

How could NDE researchers overlook or ignore something so obvious?

To Long’s credit, he didn’t stop there. He also wrote in his 2016 book that his research agreed with at least part of Barbara Rommer’s research, which was published in her book Blessing in Disguise: Another Side of the Near Death Experience in 2000. Long agreed with Rommer’s research that indicated that distressing near-death experiences “provide motivation to the NDEr to reconsider prior choices, thoughts, and beliefs.”

Here’s what Rommer actually said in her book:

“The Less-Than-Positive Experience (LTP) is a spiritual wake-up call, causing the person to stop, look back, and review past choices. It can help him or her understand the consequences of those choices, reevaluate thought patterns and ‘glitches’ in thinking or reasoning, and then make necessary changes where indicated. The LTP becomes the nexus point of that individual’s path, causing him or her to change their walk and direction.”

“Not only do I believe that it is the person who causes the LTP to happen, but he or she is also responsible for the type of imagery that occurs in the experience and the total content of it. In the LTP, we see what we need to see, hear what we need to hear, and feel what we need to feel in order to do those reevaluations.”

Read this carefully. While Rommer is not saying directly that bad thoughts, bad behaviors, and bad choices can cause hellish NDEs, her statements imply that.

Now notice that the IANDS page does not include the above quote, or the sentiments of that quote. Instead, it paraphrases another quote from Rommer that makes it sound like there is no correlation between bad behavior and hellish experiences. Here’s what the IANDS page says:

“Although people have sometimes wondered whether good people have pleasurable experiences and bad people have distressing ones, research has shown no such relationship between apparent life deeds and type of NDE.”

What did Rommer actually say? She said this:

“It is tempting to think that a ‘mean’ person will necessarily have a frightening or hellish experience, and a gentle, kind person have a blissful experience. Please believe me, that is absolutely not the case. Everyone has the potential of having an LTP.”

You see what’s happening here? Rommer’s first comment is ignored and her second comment is reworded to make it sound like there is no correlation between negative actions and ending up in hellish realms. That’s not what she is saying. What she is saying in her second quote is that everyone has the potential of having a hellish NDE. We may, for example, be a kind and gentle person but have something in our life that is amiss that produces a hellish experience because an aberrant thought or action may need correction.

I’ll pause here, Amphianda, and ask you who are the NDE researchers who support your contention that there is no correlation between a person’s thoughts and actions and experiencing hellish realms? The only researcher that I am aware of that has said things like this is <PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED_PERSON>. And her comments on this particular point are not only extreme, but easily refuted. Take this quote for example:

“There is NO EVIDENCE [Bush’s emphasis] that these experiences are punishments for wrong beliefs or unacceptable or evil behavior.”

The evidence that counteracts this statement is what many of the people who have had negative NDEs tell us. They say, point blank, that they ended up in hellish realms as the direct result of negative thoughts and actions. They weren’t being punished, per se, but they were having their own bad behavior reflected back to them.

Bush also discounts the research of Rommer and P.M.H. Atwater who both indicate that there are causal connections between how a person lives their life and experiencing distressing NDEs.

Setting aside the fact that many people who experience hellish NDEs return to this world and tell us exactly why they experienced what they did, I don’t understand how we can believe NDEs when they tell us that we all create our realities, but then turn around and throw this universal truth out the window when it comes to hellish experiences. If we are creating the other things we experience in our lives, it stands to reason we are also creating hellish experiences.

But I digress.

Wrap Up

I’ll wrap things up by saying three things:

1. The information that IANDS has posted on their website concerning hellish and distressing experiences needs to be updated.

3. Finally, the research I’ve been doing on this subject, which is constantly being updated, clearly indicates what I have repeatedly told you:

Most (not all, but the vast majority) of the hellish near-death experiences appear to be the direct result of people engaging in various kinds of selfish, self-centered, materialistic, unloving, and ungodlike thoughts and activities. There are many exceptions, but this is the general rule. If you will PLEASE visit the page I have posted on NHNE’s Formula website about NDEs and hell this will be perfectly clear. For the umpteenth time, this page is full of first person accounts of these experiences. Many of these accounts include graphic descriptions OF THE KINDS OF THOUGHTS AND BEHAVIORS THAT PRODUCED THESE EXPERIENCES. Again, THESE ARE EXPERIENCERS THEMSELVES DESCRIBING WHAT THEY LEARNED ABOUT HOW AND WHY THEY ENDED UP IN HELLISH REALMS.

Please read the comments and watch the videos that are archived on this page. It’s a waste of both of our time to have these conversations if you haven’t studied the hellish accounts that I have collected.

Categories

Quotes

"Unlike spiritual paths that arose from the ideas and inner experiences of lone, isolated human beings, the path presented by near-death experiences is emerging as a direct, grassroots revelation that millions of people from all over the world are receiving and sharing. If we explore this newly emerging path deeply enough, we discover that all religions, philosophies, and cultures are honored; that science and spirituality are celebrated; that both the human and spiritual side of our natures are cherished and embraced. In short, near-death experiences present us with a universal, all-inclusive, perfectly integrated spiritual path that revolves around three core truths: 1. We are all one; 2. Love is the essence of life; 3. We are here, in this world, to become perfect embodiments of the Divine." -- David Sunfellow

“Merely learning about the near-death experience has effects similar to those reported by NDErs.” -- Kenneth Ring,
from "Lessons from the Light"

“For me personally, I’m showing more love to others now than before I started my near-death-experience studies. My understanding of near-death experiences has made me a better doctor. I face life with more courage and confidence. I believe NDErs really do bring back a piece of the afterlife. When NDErs share their remarkable experiences, I believe a piece of the afterlife, in some mysterious way, becomes available to us all.” -- Jeffrey Long, "Evidence of the Afterlife"

"I'm not asking you to believe anything. I'm simply telling you what I believe. And I have no idea what the next life will be like. Whatever I saw was only from the doorway, so to speak. But it was enough to convince me totally of two things from that moment on: One, that our consciousness does not cease with physical death; that it becomes, in fact, keener and more aware than ever. And secondly, that how we spend our time on earth, the kind of relationships we build, is vastly more important than we can know." -- George G. Ritchie, M.D., summarizing his famous near-death experience which helped launch the near-death experience movement. From his book, "Return From Tomorrow"

"Many events in my life I experienced, but not from how I remembered it, but from the point of view... [of] how the people, animals, environment experienced it around me. I felt it as my own. The times I had made others happy, and sad, I felt it all as they did. It was very apparent that every single thought, word, and action affects everything around us and indeed the entire universe. Trees, plants, animals too. I have been a long-term vegetarian since about 18 years old and I know this was appreciated and is a good choice in life. Spiritually it seemed to show proof of respect for all life, and even seemed to balance some of the negative and wicked things I have done in my life. In the life review we judge ourselves; no one else does. The light/god did not. But with no ego left -- and no lies -- we can't hide from what we have done and feel remorse and shame, especially in the presence of this love and light. Some of the things in life we think of as important don't seem to be so important there. But some of the insignificant things from the material human perspective are very important spiritually." -- Justin U describing his near-death experience on the NDERF website

"I have never interviewed anyone who had a near-death experience who told me that they came back to make more money or to spend more time at their jobs away from their families... Instead, they become convinced that they need to be more loving and kind. They react to their experience by living life to its fullest. They believe their lives have a purpose, even if that purpose is obscure to them. Invariably it involves concepts such as love of family or service to others. They seem to know that the love they create while living will be reflected and radiated back to them when they die." -- Melvin Morse, M.D., from his book, Parting Visions

“I went into this tunnel, and I came into this room that was just beautiful. God held me, He called me by name, and He told me, ‘Mary Jo, you can’t stay.’ And I wanted to stay. I protested. I said, ‘I can’t stay? Why not?’ And I started talking about all the reasons; I was a good wife, I was a good mother, I did 24-hour care with cancer patients. And He said, ‘Let me ask you one thing -- have you ever loved another the way you’ve been loved here?’ And I said, ‘No, it’s impossible. I’m a human.’ And then He just held me and said, ‘You can do better.’ ” -- Mary Jo Rapini, describing her near-death experience

"I asked them if there were other worlds. And they said, yes, the universe is full of other worlds -- and there are other dimensions of other physical universes and those are full of other worlds." -- Howard Storm describing his NDE in "My Descent Into Death"

"The Light kept changing into different figures, like Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, mandalas, archetypal images and signs. I asked the Light, “What is going on here? Please, Light, clarify yourself for me... The Light responded. The information transferred to me was that during your life after death experience your beliefs shape the kind of feedback you are getting before the Light. If you were a Buddhist or Catholic or Fundamentalist, you get a feedback loop of your own stuff. You have a chance to look at it and examine it, but most people do not. As the Light revealed itself to me, I became aware that what I was really seeing was our higher Self matrix." -- Mellen-Thomas Benedict

"God gave everything to us, everything is here -- this is where it's at. And what we are into now is God's exploration of God through us. People are so busy trying to become God that they ought to realize that we are already God and God is becoming us. That's what it is really about. When I realized this, I was finished with the void, and wanted to return to this creation..." -- Mellen-Thomas Benedict

“In one of my visits with the Light I was told that the near-death experience... would become more and more popular and it would have an affect on the entire world when a critical mass was hit and all these people have died and come back and are telling you that there is a lot more going on than we think." -- Mellen-Thomas Benedict