Communication examination on the subject of extraterrestrials and contact has been and still is a critical need in current human reality. When we pause to consider that in the last hundred years our population explosion, our use of electricity and mechanical devices, including nuclear technology, as well as our many forms of broadcast communications, we have literally ‘lit up’ our world. It is akin to setting up a digital billboard in your front yard advertising your presence. Therefore it can be theorized that the matter of Extra-terrestrial Contact is a subject which if we don’t go to the trouble of immersing ourselves in before-hand, it will come home to roost literally over our heads eventually, unexpected, into a population unsettled by its complete surprise to the event.
Beyond the obvious discussions engaged in the subject matter within Exopolitics, Ufology, and Science Fiction Literature, who else has made early efforts at broaching this topic? And what is its importance to Exopolitical Mediation? A recent article from a website in the exopolitical field specializing in exopsychology has examined the sparse address of the subject and notes the following:
“Theologians take the prize for being first off the mark, for having had lengthy discussions about the existence of extraterrestrials, and possible contact scenarios. Their work has been so extensive that it deserves a separate entry,” [1} – Michael Gintowt.
Mr. Gintowt, a notable psychologist delving into exopsychology, has published another remarkable article on his blog: Exopsychology In the article titled “Exoisms: foreshadowing of a New Age, or macro-egoism?” he examines the “trailblazers who have considered the implications of contact with an Intelligent Extraterrestrial Race (ET).” He explores his interest in the meaning and relevance of visionary extensions into an uncertain future and considers how the strength of our collective vanity as a race may hinder us in our conceptual explorations of contact scenarios. For all those interested in the mechanics involved in exopolitical mediation, I highly recommend this article for it gives due consideration to the baggage which all participants, including the Mediator, his or herself, can and will bring to the communications table.
Our examinations of contact scenarios are forms of conceptual communications or if you prefer, preparations for experiential communications in which the concepts or abstract notions and mental impressions of contact scenarios are played out in practice. These surface from our collective understanding of reality, incorporating endless ideas of what ET life might exist as, and then are experimented with for their logic and potentialities. Within these scenarios are enmeshed contact mythologies and sometimes even the asserted Contact Experience. Michael rightly explores our psychological reasonings, aspirations, and pursuit of “uncertain patterns”.
After relating a number of examples, he goes on to say, “that the evidence (for contact) is not crystal clear, unambiguous, and simple to behold. It is fuzzy, vague, incomplete, and a perfect backdrop for the projection of our mental contents.”
Now how do these explorations benefit exopolitical mediation? What does this understanding of evidence for contact as ambiguous or incomplete, bring to the communication table or the application of a mediator skills? Of what use is conceptual communications on the subject of Contact to exopolitical mediation? This is where I think we revitalize how we look at communication. ”Looking at communication, not just through it to see how it affects other things, gives us a way of thinking about the events and objects of the social world that differs substantially from the modernistic way of thinking. Our attention is drawn to wholes rather than parts; to dynamics rather than substances; to reflectivity rather than linear relations; and to interactions rather than single actions,” [2] W. Barnett Pearce, School of Human and Organization Development, Fielding Graduate University.
The conceptual communications within the dynamics of Exopolitics or those built during mediation or even others presented complete through the direct contact experiencer, gives us the ability to closely examine the root context within which the information originates for the purpose of deep understanding of the communications and participants involved. It will likely be a conglomeration of the participants and experiencer’s interpretations and the source intent of their experience. Context in exopolitical mediation includes but is not limited to, the experiencer’s and participants’ culture, their psychological state, their educational and life experience level, and their personal mythos of individual existence…so too will it also include the level of ability, type and style of communication, and intents on the part of the extra-terrestrial contacting party, as well as a whole series of contextual ranges on the part of the receiving public who is without doubt a theoretical if not actual participant in the mediation circle. An in-depth examination of context is very important to facilitating the mediator’s understanding of the participants involved in the mediation. This examination of context allows us to delineate the actual identity of participants in the mediation circle.
It is in my mind to suggest that it may be worthy for exopolitical mediators to look, within the context, at the instigator of both our own ‘mental contents’ and that of our participants various ‘mental contents’, the oh so infamous ego, as another participant to the mediation circle. The ego inserts its own purposes and needs and therefore may transcend or overtake the communication process, intent, or specific content. By placing the ego within its own category as a participant we give ourselves awareness of its presence and It, its own voice, so that we can therefore gain an opportunity to separate it from the originating source of individual communications.
What is ego? Is it a true representation of us? When we stop to consider ego in our lives, most of us would say no, that is not truly us, not deep down because we have separated what we tend to fall into existentially from what we think of ourselves as mentally, and what we expect or strive for ourselves to be. The pressure to conform to our human ego is very great. Our egos are wrapped up in our social perception of societal expectations which are both extrinsic, concerning relationships of our social groups, and intrinsic, concerning our own behavior, opinions, issues, values, and goals as expected by ourselves or of us by our social groups. The ego is a construct of all these things and does not always adhere to what we really believe or value in ourselves or others.
The exopolitical mediator can use the delineation and identification of ego in the scope of examining conceptual communications and their contexts to increase his or her ‘interpersonal linkage power [3]. This power is the mediators ability based on their perceived influence with people who control psychological or social resources within a participatory group. This power is necessary to developing a group culture among participants where a collective personality and point of view or understanding is negotiated by the members (participants) of the mediation group; in whatever way those participants are defined in the mediation process.
In closing I offer a reference to conceptual communications, in which Michael Gintowt refers to speculation about ETs, giving it a definition as, “about attempting to lead the way into the future, to break new ground, to innovate, to find meaning in work, and contribute by asking questions, as opposed to furnishing answers – which is a good thing, because excellent science is based on asking the right questions.”
Congratulations go to the theologians for taking the initiative to be among the trail-blazers, those who dove in first.
Notes:
-----------------------
[1] Exopsychology, “Exoisms: foreshadowing of a New Age, or macro-egoism?”, Michael Gintowt, 2009
[2] TOWARD COMMUNICATIVE VIRTUOSITY: A MEDITATION ON MODERNITY AND OTHER FORMS OF COMMUNICATION© W. Barnett Pearce, 2005, School of Human and Organization Development, Fielding Graduate University
[3] Creating Competent Communications, Yoder, Hugenberg, Wallace, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 1996, page 326.
