Developmental Psychology and Intelligent Disclosure
In relation to an extraterrestrial presence, we may be dealing with “Hyperobjects” or “Multiple Objects.” For intelligently influencing an Intelligent Disclosure we would need to study Developmental Psychology and how human consciousness and subjectivity may deal with these objects.
Consciousness can be understood as the capacity to experience meaning, in fact, forms of meaning, including how to interpret them. The meanings of experience are normally related to objects of experience and, ultimately, even consciousness itself can be understood as an object of its own experience. Therefore, epistemology and ontology are not separate. Meanings can be of multiple kinds like sensations (pain, pleasure), sentiments/feelings, concepts, ultimate spiritual meanings…any form of meaning.
Leading a ‘sensible’ human adaptation to emergent, culturally and instinctively-challenging global issues requires a global form of integrative perspective-taking. This would be a level of interpretation capable of appreciating the importance of previous forms of interpretation in such a way that its possible to work with individuals interpreting reality under such previous levels. Moreover, it would be a form of interpretation that operates under a more extended experience of “meaningful time” in which for practical purposes the motivation to act in the present experience includes more of the past and of the future.
A creative, adaptive political and cultural acknowledgment of a globally active, advanced, non-human extraterrestrial presence on Earth is akin to intelligently dealing with culturally-challenging, global issues like “climate change.” These are issues which are so widely distributed in space and in time that only fragments of their meaning can be grasped simultaneously by most people. They trump traditional ideas about what a thing is in the first place. These issues are called “hyperobjects” by Timothy Morton, author of “Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World” (2013). They require a completely different way of thinking and being in the world; quite likely post binary, connecting the subjective and objective realms of experience and inclusive of a type of science in which the non-physical consciousness, information and subtler forms of energy are used to modify physical matter.
On the other hand, integrative philosopher Sean Esbjörn-Hargens consider climate change and similar issues as “multiple objects.” This is an object that is objectively real but enacted through different subjective perspectives producing different meanings about it. I think that the “global technologically advanced, non-human, presence related to UFOs” can also be considered as a “multiple object.”
In the following article, Gail Hochachka studies the multiple responses to the issue of “climate change” under the aegis of Developmental Psychology. With a greater capacity for taking multiple perspectives, individuals may be able to deal with “hyperobjects” or with “multiple objects” more appropriately. Hochachka also shows how individuals operating under different interpretive levels of development “make meaning” including greater or lesser degrees of the present, past and future considerations accompanying different degree of abstraction and personal identifications.
I recognize the crucial importance that TTSA has played in moving the UFO subject into the mainstream, serving as a bridge between the highest levels of secrecy and the general public. However, it is time for many more serious cultural influencers to join a serious conversation regarding the “global, technologically advanced, non-human presence related to UFOs” beyond the influence of those in the know within military and intelligence circles who may only be able to interpret the situation under particular valid but partial limited perspectives. But we must rise to the challenge surpassing conventional modes of thinking.
If UAP intelligences are able to handle a more extended present, a present that includes more of the future and of the past in a non-linear way as Luis Elizondo suggested (as a personal opinion) during a MUFON interview (see the May 2018 edition of “The MUFON Journal”), their conscious capacity for doing so may be similar or above an integrative perspective-taking capacity. At the very least, they would also be able to adequately understand “hyperobjects” or “multiple objects” and think in global and species-wide terms in constructive and adaptive ways. And this would entail that eventually most of humanity would also need to rise to an integrative perspective-taking capacity.
“What if there were other species or
even humans, where their understanding of the present,
that optic, that spark, is maybe a little bit bigger? Maybe
that optic is a little bit wider. Rather than being a point,
maybe it’s a range. Maybe the understanding of the present
isn’t a point, but it’s a range, and maybe there’s elements of
the future and the past that are experienced as the present,
and, therefore, what we perceive as linear space-time maybe
others don’t. In fact, maybe these are things that have lived
here forever, before us. Maybe, we share the space with
them.” (Luis Elizondo).
even humans, where their understanding of the present,
that optic, that spark, is maybe a little bit bigger? Maybe
that optic is a little bit wider. Rather than being a point,
maybe it’s a range. Maybe the understanding of the present
isn’t a point, but it’s a range, and maybe there’s elements of
the future and the past that are experienced as the present,
and, therefore, what we perceive as linear space-time maybe
others don’t. In fact, maybe these are things that have lived
here forever, before us. Maybe, we share the space with
them.” (Luis Elizondo).
Whether UAP or UFO intelligences pose an actual physical threat or not (and I surmise that most don’t), not rising to a capacity for understanding tantamount to dealing with “hyperobjects” may produce a cultural type of threat since we would not be able to adapt. We would need to adapt to cultures that may not want to conquer us as technologically advanced cultures did on Earth against less technologically developed ones. However, their understanding of complexity, consciousness, information, in a post-materialist way capable of transcending our spacetime-limited cultural traditions may be a threat if we are unable to rise to the challenge. It would require the greatest shift for human civilization since the taming of fire and the discovery of stone tools. What if (just like “hyperobjects” or “multiple objects”) “they” (the UAP or UFO intelligences) may be already participating inside of us as we may be participating inside of them? What if we can only understand this if we rise above a rigid, binary distinction between objectivity and subjectivity? Rigid distinctions between “us” and “them” would melt along with rigid distinctions between our “present” linear, interpretive experiences and non-existing pasts and futures.
Gail Hochachka’s study would also be useful to cultural leaders willing to influence the ways society may respond to a “global technologically advanced, non-human presence related to UFOs” inasmuch as its reality is becoming uncontroversial. With the aim of promoting a healthy, adaptive response to the technologically advanced, non-human presence in society, we need to study Developmental Psychology and how a greater number of individuals may intelligently or constructively relate to “Hyperobjects” or “Multiple Objects.” The good news is that human capacity seems to be able to reach an integrative level suitable for an adequate, intelligent cultural adaptation and flourishing under the new circumstances. We just need to implement ways to promote the massive psychological development of individuals up to that level. We need the political will beyond the hyper nationalisms in vogue today. Realistically speaking, only perhaps by being forced to deal with the extraordinary realities at hand will activate that political will.
Hochachka’s study can be useful to the intellectually serious disclosure activist, UFO researcher, experiencer or exopolitician since a “global, technologically advanced, non-human presence related to UFOs” can also be considered a “hyperobject” or as a “multiple object.” Again, understanding the human capacity to intelligently relate with such objects would be crucial for politically and culturally influencing or guiding a policy of “intelligent disclosure” in an adaptive, positive, constructive manner.
Sources
Hochachka, Gail (2019). “On matryoshkas and meaning-making: Understanding the plasticity of climate change.” https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0959378018309762?token=D77478FF2E973E616FF618580A7BDC87B07DB7D8FC1B7012979A7BD5F00FD8B1B43CC12B5F15030D6CC5D9FAF61D1D2D
Hochachka, Gail (2019). “On Matryoshkas and Meaning-making: Understanding the Plasticity of Climate Change.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378018309762
Kloetzke, Chase (2018). “Luis Elizondo: MUFON’s Exclusive Interview.” https://mufon.z2systems.com/neon/resource/mufon/files/MAY2018MUFONJournalWEB(1).pdf
Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, Benevolent Extraterrestrials, Climate Change, Consciousness, contactees, Extraterrestrials, Gail Hochachka, Giorgio Piacenza, hyperobjects, Luis Elizondo, To the Stars Academy, ufo, UFO disclosure
Dennis O'Neill
Great insights in this article although I often find the jargon and the abstract, often downright nebulous or poorly defined concepts to which the jargon refers, both in psychology and neuroscience, particularly as used by philosophers who write about neuroscience off putting. The second through the fourth or fifth paragraph of the article were a bit mushy in my opinion.