align-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcamerachatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-crosscrosseditfacebookglobegoogleimagesinstagramlocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartwitteryahoo

Consciousness Dialogs

Guest Speaker:

Roberta Grimes on Afterlife Communications

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


While you and I have lips and voices which

Are for kissing and to sing with

Who cares if some one-eyed son of a bitch

Invents an instrument to measure spring with?

- e. e. cummings

Can consciousness only be examined through science? Or can consciousness be examined through consciousness itself?  Does history, literature, anthropology, meditation, mystic experience, philosophy, anomaly, the testimonies of millions, have anything to say about consciousness? Or must all defer to the epistemological hegemony of science?

This Consciousness Dialog looks at consciousness from all perspectives and gazes fearlessly at the astonishing and baffling mystery presented by the existence of the universe without restricting thought to the reductive ontological lens of the scientific method.  And consciousness is an inseparable part of that mystery.

Now are afterlife communications woo-woo, spooky, and forbidden fringe?  Then, one could ask, what could be spookier than consciousness itself? We can at least conceive of an empirical verification for afterlife messages or telepathy.  But consciousness itself is the brute fact of an ontological reality entirely different than matter. It is undeniably real, yet as immaterial as a ghost. It has no mass, no dimension, and no measurable objective existence. What could be more supernatural?  And yet here it is, non-physical phenomena haunting the entire planet.

Science is driven to say that it must be physical somehow because everything must be physical. Note that this is not based on scientific evidence but on the philosophical premise that the only thing irreducibly real is physical.

We often hear, “There is no evidence for consciousness independent of a brain. When you die, you die.  The consciousness is gone and the evidence is a corpse without consciousness."  And that is all science has.

But let us apply the same model to a cell phone:  If you break a cell phone the people inside it are gone and they are not coming back. But wait a minute, we can go out and find those people and show that they still exist and were only speaking through the cell phone. Obviously there is another possible model for consciousness.


Roberta Grimes, a local practicing attorney, had an experience of light at the age of eight, and a second one at the age of twenty, which set her on a course to try to understand those experiences. In the process she studied nearly two centuries of abundant and consistent afterlife communication. Compiling those communications, she has found a consistent testimony of a rich, varied, and complex existence that is as real as our own.  As a result she wrote a book, “The Fun of Dying”. She has had many speaking engagements and radio broadcasts across the country. But of late, her attention has turned to the implications of consciousness for our understanding of the nature of reality. What are the implications for science? For neuroscience?  For cosmology?  For quantum physics? 

Roberta believes these communications tell us something about who and what we really are. She will speak on her afterlife studies and current thinking and then there will be a follow-up Q & A and discussion.

















 

Join or login to comment.

  • steven h.

    The conversation was quiet and warm about things that mattered and about a subject that we don't talk about much. It is like getting on a train for a 100,000 mile journey and not thinking about where it is going or what to wear or if vaccinations are needed or if we need money or reservations when we get there.

    June 13, 2013

  • Randy

    I'm bummed. I thought meeting was on Thursday. I was so looking forward to it.

    My best to all and see ya next time

    June 12, 2013

    • steven h.

      I missed hearing the comments you most surely would have had.

      June 13, 2013

  • A former member
    A former member

    great speaker, really interesting topic I knew very little about

    June 12, 2013

  • Darshan A.

    I'd have loved to attend these discussions if it weren't for my busy schedules today. See you next time Bobbie.

    June 12, 2013

  • A former member
    A former member

    I am going a bit early to get a bite to eat. so see you all there.

    June 12, 2013

  • steven h.

    Bringing Cynthia

    June 12, 2013

  • Desiree W

    I have plans that night, new to the group. Looking forward to the next meeting.

    June 9, 2013

  • Bill M.

    Coming with Patricia

    June 8, 2013

  • Linda F.

    I would love to attend, but I have another commitment.

    June 6, 2013

  • Phillip W.

    Some how I though epistemological hegemony was the province of religion. I was somehow thinking that the job of science was to continually question science and any and all hegemony. Just me I guess.

    June 6, 2013

  • Clay W.

    Wish I could attend, but have a book group that night.

    June 6, 2013

7 went

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy