Editor’s Foreword (Janice Miner Holden, EdD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-1-p1-2
Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?
Editorial: Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview? (Janice Miner Holden, EdD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p81-90
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (John R. Audette, MS): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p91-94
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Thomas Brophy, PhD, on behalf of the Institute of Noetic Sciences): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p95-96
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?”: Why IANDS Should Not Endorse a Specific Worlview (Nancy Evans Bush, MA): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p97-102
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?”: Why IANDS Should Not Endorse a Specific Worlview (Bruce Greyson, MD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p103-108
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Neal Grossman, PhD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p109-111
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?”: Maybe Keep the Original Statement But Add Something to It? (Edward F. Kelly, PhD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p112-114
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Jeffrey Long, MD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p115-120
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (David Lorimer, MA, PGCE, FRSA): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p121-122
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?”: Balancing Perspectives: The Significance of Empirical Evidence in Scientific Inquiry (Charlotte Martial, PhD; Pauline Fritz, MSc; & Olivia Gosseries, PhD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p123-128
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Robert G. Mays, BSc; & Suzanne B. Mays, AAS): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p129-131
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Kenneth Ring, PhD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p132-133
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?”: NDE Research Needs Firm Guiderails but Soft Boundaries (David Rousseau, PhD, BEng, FRSA): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p134-144
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Michael Sabom, MD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p145-149
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Pim van Lommel, MD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p150-153
Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Marjorie Woollacott, PhD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p154
Rejoinder to Responses to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?” (Janice Miner Holden, EdD; Marjorie Woollacott, PhD; Robert G. Mays, BSc; and Norman Klaunig, MA, MBA, NCC, LPCAssociate (TX), PhD student): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p155-162
Book Review
The Substance of Consciousness: A Comprehensive Defense of Contemporary Substance Dualism by Brandon Rickebaugh & J. P. Moreland (Reviewed by Gary Habermas, PhD): https://doi.org/10.17514/JNDS-2023-41-2-p163-166