Sunday, July 14, 2013

Exopolitics and Integral Theory Connected as an Attempt to Understand Transdimensional Extraterrestrial Thinking

UNTIL I LEARN HOW TO POST IT THE LINK IS AT http://authors.exopaedia.org/piacenza/Exopolitics_and_Integral_Theory.pdf
Preamble


This is a preliminary inquiry into the practical and cultural advantages of combining the objective, social, scientific field and political movement of “Exopolitics” with a particularly inclusive “Theory of Everything” called “Integral Theory,” seeking to extend and complement both into a working synthesis. Both of this emergent approached of knowledge and praxis (responding to unique, planetary-wide, complex situations) explore comprehensive ways to process qualitative and quantitative research premises and methods and to transcend dichotomous prejudices and thinking habits. I assume that in order to communicate intelligently with extraterrestrial beings we need to get a clearer idea of how the Cosmos is structured. We would also need to have a useful integral model to restructure society and to achieve a less physically motivated understanding of ourselves as a self-reflective, intelligent species. To end our planetary isolation and connect with a cosmic community capable of overcoming classical physical limitations we’ll have to achieve a much more integrated understanding of human development, our motivations and of the fundamental structuring processes of “reality.” In relation to this endeavor, I think that Integral Theory and Exopolitics need each other to “grow up” and that each leaves out compatible elements which the other one supplies. Furthermore, Integral Theory (not exclusively but along with other integrative models and approaches) may also provide crucial elements of a basic framework useful to advance various aspects of Exopolitics, other emerging, integrative fields and also well-established academic fields.


I explore concepts that may help us make sense of complex, organized systems under a relational, multi-paradigmatic and more inclusive logic not simply limited to that mostly used for classical physical realities. I try to show that several notions accompanying Exopolitics and Integral Theory  can converge and synergistically reinforce each other to overcome obsolete expressions of cultural exclusivism and of dichotomous, reductionist thinking. I explore necessary scientific and metaphysical themes which –when integrated under a new light- may assist us to understand the procedures of a complex (even if incredible) “transdimensional” extraterrestrial presence beckoning us to “rise to the occasion” for our world cultures to learn to intelligently relate with it under a common understanding. For this reason, I also attempt, not only to syncretically and synergistically combine two emerging fields of transformational importance, but also to deepen this combined inquiry into unchartered possibilities.     


I think that extraterrestrial intelligences are present in a way that transcends our ordinary, classical intuitive concepts and particularly how physical effects can be created through an interaction with a more inclusive level of reality. I think that associating with these intelligent extraterrestrial presences in a politically coherent and mutually beneficial manner will not just require personal, national, institutional interest or simple awareness of the facts, but the emergence of politically viable, integral levels of consciousness and a practical knowledge synthesis of their associated integrative theories. Thus, we must not just “open up our minds” (including our empathy, our ethical embrace and sentiments) to vaster possibilities wanting to know (past one-world-centered limited traditions) what is really going on or simply become activists for disclosure but also become capable of relating intellectually and methodologically with the scientific and metaphysical implications of the extraterrestrial presence. If extraterrestrials use “transdimensional technologies” we need to explore our options under the aegis of general concepts about reality which visiting ETs might use or under what principles they might operate in order to intelligently decipher meaning during any serious communicative exchange or political interaction with them. The convergence of Integral Theory and information found in Exopolitics might assist us to discover some of these co0ncepts.


Introduction


First of all I assume that there already exists sufficient objective, experiential, scientific, documentary and witness evidence (carefully and consistently accumulated at least over six decades) to accept the fact that there is indeed a complex, intelligent extraterrestrial presence physically and multi dimensionally (in fact, transdimensionally) interacting with humanity as we know it on Earth. This may be obvious to some who are predisposed to believe and may be ludicrous to others embedded with a sense of modern, “rational,” physical objectivity and academic orthodoxy.  However, the fact is that much evidence has been disclosed by reasonable, ethical and adequately objective individuals and their research adds up.


If your “realistic” sense of reality inclines you to dismiss please first carefully revise the valiant combined efforts of Donald E. Kehoe, J. Allen Hynek, Richard M. Dolan, Leslie Kean, Wendelle C. Stevens, Richard H. Hall, Don Berliner, Timothy Good, Stanton Friedman, Raymond E. Fowler, Gordon Creighton, Colin Andrews, Col. Philip Corso, Roger Leir, John Mack, Leo Sprinkle, A.J. Gevaerd, Lord Hill Norton, Paul Hellyer, Edgar Mitchell and Gordon Cooper. Explore the converging research activities of Michael E. Salla (Exopolitics Institute), Joanne Summerscales (AMMACH), Jaime Maussan (Televisa); and Bob Brown (International UFO Congress). There is France’s GEIPAN and the COMETA Report, plus a great number of credible “experiencers” (abductees and contactees worldwide often risking their peace of mind, jobs and reputation to honorably come out in public). Besides, it may suffice to say that there are physically analyzed alien implants with artificial (nano technological) and otherworldly (isotopic ratios not naturally occurring on Earth) physical characteristics. There also are many genuine crop circles in several countries displaying plant and soil anomalies (see Dr. Leavengood’s work); an ever increasing number of declassified UFO files from countries like Great Britain, Mexico, Brazil. There are credible people seeing not just “lights in the sky” but structured ovoid-disc shaped, purposefully moving metallic vehicles defying momentum, inertia and gravity and much, much more. Besides this, there also are numerous analyses of UFO films and photographs and dozens of highly credible witnesses in Steven Greer’s “Disclosure Project,” Leslie Kean’s interviews, Don Berliner and Antonio Huuneus’ “Rockefeller Initiative” and in Stephen Bassett’s Citizen’s Hearing on Disclosure collectively and sufficiently establish that fact. 


The problem is not a lack of good, cumulative evidence that can be cross-referenced or how relevant this reality might be since it also intersects with our “physical reality system.” The problem is our stubborn tendency to hold on to a knowledge-stalling, dismissive ATTITUDE associated with a physicalist intuitive sense that all of this is cannot possibly be “real,” or that it eventually doesn’t matter because it is not part of our ordinary concerns and daily needs in classical material life. Since would be natural skeptics who nonetheless are “in the know” also act as knowledge containers and debunkers and since the UFO/ET presence is elusive and strange while challenging our spontaneously rising physical instincts, it has been fairly easy to suppress.  Reality itself is not recognized beneath its veneer given to our classical sensations and most orthodox academic and religious endeavors do not delve into these questions or into “anomalies” but instead into the popular need to satisfy material needs based on classical material methods, or to “liberate us” or else “save us” bypassing the discovery of the processes through which we already participate in a multidimensional Cosmos. Thus, when we are born into the physical Earth density we not only tend to forget (acquiring a self-centered survival instinct) but are easily indoctrinated to value classical physical processes.
With the “visitors” reality becoming more obvious every day, both the traditional and orthodox scientific stories of human origins as we know them are at stake. How we understand ourselves is at stake. 


Religionists and scientists would have to adapt, become richer, vaster and grow and I have no doubt they are able to do so. They would have to be revised and open up to “interdimensional” evidence, to all the realities with which our consciousness may relate or manifest with. However, its opposite: an uncritical fascination with UFOs, ETs and things otherworldly (often limited to scary or enthralling but nonetheless particular emotionally-satisfying aspects of the phenomenon) can also do more harm than good for a serious disclosure to proceed and gives allegedly reasonable debunkers even more reasons to dismiss, ridicule and misinform. In fact, we need balance and a love for Truth that calls for that balance. I think that both blank denial and an excited acceptance of the unknown both reflect attachment to an incomplete sense of reality in which short-term, pre-verbal, physical and biological and psychological predispositions converge supported by partial, pre-integral models and creeds.


All of this stubborn human limitation definitely plays into the hands of the secretly imposed “Truth Embargo” (a phrase aptly used by exopolitical activist Stephen Bassett), to those thinking that We the People don’t have it in us to know the truth. This “truth embargo” was most likely initially established through executive orders during the Roosevelt, the Truman and Einsenhower presidencies and it would be an “embargo” which soon escaped both any meaningful executive and-or congressional democratic oversight and left in the hands of (mostly well-intended people) that treated the matter patriotically as an issue of national security.


The polarization and reductionism on the part of “true believers” and closed-minded skeptics plays into the hands of those who, for our own (genuine or imagined) protection (or also it seems for their own selfish interests) keep a democratic majority and the world from knowing the truth and growing up into a cosmic civilization. This could have been understandable right after two major world wars during the rise of communist totalitarianism as avoidance against causing further social turmoil which would stop economic recovery. It was understandable that facing superior technological prowess the powers that be (then serving under three war torn presidents) tried to buy some time obtaining some of that technology. However, even today the tendency toward conceptual polarization or dichotomous thinking in human minds embedded in physicality (epitomized by “true believers” eager to know as they like it and “closed minded skeptics” eager not to know) provides reasons to maintain alive the cover-up and the political and academic dread of being derided and losing credibility.


The Meeting of Minds


Integralists advancing in strides in particular areas of knowledge, being and praxis tend not to be completely integral. Their particular movements and ideologies are still too partial or focused on sub areas of interest to deal with the UFO/ET presence in an intelligent manner. They are generally trying to establish their particular visions as legitimate. However, they need to grow beyond their attachments to aspects of integrality and-or to the particular founding personalities, visionaries, intellectual trailblazers. They need to recognize and integrate with each other. That’s the next step to coalesce into a great voice that will be heard, after listening to each other and completing each other’s blind spots and deficiencies.


The more post postmodern integralists grow together and are able to combine their compatible integrative approaches apply this ethos to politics, law, culture, religion, spirituality and science, the more we’ll converge into a mature civilization capable of freely and intelligently choosing our destiny in the concert of worlds. We need to develop this all-inclusive attitude, approach and model to grow out of our cosmic innocence, isolation and parochialism and to begin relating as informed equals with extraterrestrial beings because particularly with the increase of credible whistleblowers, physical analysis and declassified UFO documents, the reality of their presence is becoming almost impossible to deny in a rational manner.


Definitely, integrating valid positive assertions and discoveries found in post postmodern (and previous) integrative models will be imperative to make sense of it all and to start educating the world population while figuring out the extraterrestrial’s different motivations, natures, inclinations, their past involvements with our cultural and biological formative steps, their levels of consciousness and different technological capabilities. We need to find who are our friends and foes even if both may partially be our forefathers and if we - after all - need to re-establish a mutually respectful relationship with both. We need to find out how religion and spirituality may accommodate or be enhanced with the Truth of all this rather than fight it, ridicule it, simplify it. We also need to become savvy regarding civilizations in the Cosmos seeking to understand them (and our evolving roles in among them) rather than to simply demonize them or idolize them. We need to understand the patterns connecting the realms of body (science and Truth), mind (psychology and the collective Good) and spirit (first person Beauty and mysticism), not only in relation to our physical world but much more clearly in every cosmic level. We need an ample “meeting of the minds.”


More specifically, I consider Exopolitics and the Integral Movement to be two emerging, transdisciplinary, post postmodern, politically-viable movements which distinctively reveal a more inclusive and necessary level of awareness arising in humanity today. Both, (like quantum mechanics informing us of a “non-local” - yet possibly interactive - level of reality), let us know that there’s a deeper and more encompassing existence that does not correspond with the normal (local, classical) premises under which we (but with diminishing coherence) normally organize our lives.  


I take both Exopolitics and Integral Theory to be profoundly related, integrative responses emerging to deal with more obvious planetary-wide phenomena challenging us to transform ourselves, our states and levels of consciousness and our worldviews into more harmonious, non-classical, yet practical ways. Both fields treat piecemeal approaches to their particular interests as inadequate. Both may be currently considered by many classically formed intellectuals to be “at the fringe” (which doesn’t logically entail uselessness) but – through the practical necessity to face reality as it is – these disciplines may promptly (or gradually) take on central, respectable positions within academia, politics, religion and general cultural creation. In fact, as hinted, they don’t need to rescind religion of science but might help them to take a fresh look at their roots challenging them to renew and re-create while transcending and including their less connecting, conventional standards. In this re-visioning they will deepen them their reach and scope. That is part of the call the integrative post postmodern movements and disciplines emerging. Furthermore, shared transdisciplinary, organizing patterns or principles common to all of these integrative approaches (and to conventional movements and disciplines) should render Exopolitics and Integral Theory mutually reinforcing. These fields need to inform each other.


As mentioned, special findings made in various fields of “paranormal” research and in particular in scientific, objective Ufology (now integrated into Exopolitical analysis) keep demonstrating (to those willing to look into the data objectively but in a non-classical, non physicalist-reductionist ways) that extra planetary or perhaps “transdimensionally-operating” civilizations (most likely visiting us under substantially different but universally common rules of operation) have a great interest on us so that, in order for us to intelligently participate in a cosmic exchange with them as respected equals, we may need to transform the instinctive premises with which we have thus far develop our cultures, our valuations of self and others and our politics. We need to grow beyond the atavistic, psychological control of our old, classical bio-survivalist programming apparently attached to an innate discomfort of macro world, non-local worldviews and experiences which do not coincide with instinct and ordinary senses. We need to find out if our of classical survival instinct (which prompts us to pay more attention to short-term needs) can be incorporated even if transcended and illumined by other instincts pertaining to our non-local soul lives and to our complete constitution in higher levels of energetic being, which means, to our subtle bodies functioning under different, more inclusive rules.


We need to collectively establish a fresh and integral understanding about ourselves as spiritually created, conscious, evolving life forms in relation to the structuring patterns of a multi-leveled Kosmos (with a “k” to denote intelligence) in order to participate in a complex, extra planetary community which, cognitively speaking, almost certainly, operates – at the very least - under an advanced integral/transdisciplinary conjoint understanding (one not just based on their particular histories, natural tendencies, values, practices and ethics but also on shared scientific, spiritual and metaphysical principles). In fact, to manipulate space-time in order to arrive to Earth and be able to interact in our physical reality system, these civilizations probably use what may be called “transdimensional science (or knowledge)” a deeper understanding that reconnects culture, science, spirituality and metaphysics. Here the prefix “trans” implies the use of deeper levels of reality to manipulate more external ones.  As when “transdisciplinarity” means using common patterns found at a deeper cognitive level in order to connect and modify different fields as if being subsets of a more complete field (and not just using the parameters of one field to assist in the practice of another), transdimensional science/knowledge would entail using the causal laws that operate in a deeper and more inclusive level of reality in order to connect and modify different physical universes.


I think intelligent creatures themselves existing in alternate forms of physical embodiment use non-physical “dimensions” (or rather subdivisions within a Subtle, “astral” or non-physical Realm) to “tune into” our particular physical universe and time-lines. The master keys of how our universe manifests would be in the Subtle Realm; a more real (with less duality) realm which does not require the parameters of space or time for objects to exist. Exopoliticians must acquire or evolve into superior scientific, metaphysical and integral notions and integral theorists would do well to recognize the findings of Ufology and Exopolitics consider their implications for theoretical modeling. This conjunction would be extremely valuable to offer a clearer guidance to other cultural and political leaders (especially if eventually the ET presence is disclosed) and also to be more effectively conversant with ETs (and-or with Earth-based individuals “in the know,” controlling aspects of this information and-or the probable gradual release of this knowledge).


Are we Inflexibly Pre-Established?
I think that to be able to wisely participate with interplanetary, space-faring communities we need something deeper than realizing that they exist and that our democratic rights may have been trampled. We will also need to modify unvoiced assumptions behind our continuously conflicting cultures and begin generating a planetary culture in an interconnected way under a more inclusive set of principles. Awakening from this “trance” apparently defining us a species generation after generation is a much deeper affair than accepting a detached, third person idea attached to an integralist “psychologism.” It entails a major shift to empathically understand all of us and, in fact, all sentience, not as potential ‘enemies’ (in a physicalist way), but as one family essentially operating under non-physicalist rules. It entails connecting the first person, second person and third person views of reality as a coherent whole; that is, a greater “second tier” subjective empathic embrace, recognition of a much vaster level of community (galactic extraterrestrials) and a multi-realm science that transcends and includes classical, physicalist, “either-or” perspectives. Only then will we be able to individually and collectively reassess who we are, in a sense taking in a more inclusive whole and escaping the logical Godelian limitations on self-assessing consistency and-or completion.   


It would take a major reassessment not to repeat under new guises the gratuitous conflicts even if the next wave of cultural development were represented by the zeitgeist of “hierarchically organized interconnection.” This will require acknowledging realities that impinge on us and which have not been clearly and formally recognized by most scientists, religious leaders, political leaders, economists of material exploitations and “scarcity” or by disenchanting, sobering postmodern philosophers. Moreover, it seems to me that these realities (how the non-physical defines, enlivens, interacts with the physical world interconnecting it non-locally) have not even been clearly recognized by most post postmodern integralists (like many integral theorists pretending to promote the new level of consciousness suitable to guide the world from now on).
But all must start with personal interest; by caring to understand; by feeling moved by the mystery of how reality is structured, of why we are here and what may our missing pieces of cosmic history be. We must naturally care to deepen the explanations already given by scientists, philosophers and religious leaders finding out how our world of distinct objects is itself sustained by a deeper world that unites far more than what divides us and this being not just as a statement of desire, ethical or religious ideals but of fact. We would have to learn to think more inclusively on the basis of verifying common essential patterns which can be demonstrated by corresponding technologies.


We need models that not only include the wisdom from the past, unifying its different cultural and developmental expressions in its essence but also going beyond it. This “reassessment” of who we are would be exceptionally profound and far-reaching, including a serious enquiry into intuitive, pre-verbal premises which we take for granted without caring much about our innate feelings, drives, impulses and tendencies come from. We need to know why we are as we are and to find practical ways to activate our self-directed, transformation potential. Can we really make it as a species without being transformed by external forces and become inherently different beings? Will undeniable public knowledge of extraterrestrials expedite the emergence of a truly integral planetary culture?


Are we sufficiently “flexible” to re-invent ourselves or are most of our essential motivations and tendencies inflexibly pre-established? If we can’t, a series of dystopias like the gradual degradation of the quality of human life under complicated social and ecological crises, to allowing ourselves to be cibernetically replaced and-or hybridized (by human and-or extraterrestrial forces), to falling prey to a planetary dictatorship. I believe that these various dystopias (and others still unimagined) could certainly occur if enough of us don’t rise to the real challenges of beginning to live in a post-conventional world proactively adapting to a completely different, multi-dimensional (and transdimensional) reality.


Can we educate ourselves in an age in which we are surrounded by virtual streams of attention-grabbing and often disjointed stimuli competing for our self-centered commercial interests through our limited attention spans? How can we sort valuable data into integrative information? To achieve that we must count with the integration of integrative models connecting them into a much grander synthesis because each taken as a separately won’t suffice to rise to the challenge. 


Once again, I think that integrating integrative approaches is the key to our survival. It goes hand in hand with a humble yet open to Life and promoting Life attitude, integrating the Platonic values of Truth, Good and Beauty. The more we integrate integral approaches specialized in different areas of concern (previously understood more dichotomically and reductionistically), the closer we’ll be to gradually embrace and transcend our parochial (and physically-restricted) intra-planetary civilization, eventually graduating our civilization into the “First Grade” of a cosmic one. This is crucial. We must eventually learn how to motivate ourselves from “deficiency needs” to “Metamotivation needs” as signposted by Abraham Maslow.1 It may be an evolution of our perspectives or of what consciousness can hold, if you will. But it must be open-ended since an initial opening may be easily confused with a full-fledge integral attitude and we might not recognize the integral facts and qualities of other integralists associated with other aspects of the opening.
We would also have to agree (on a sufficient planetary scale) upon a minimum set of shared, transcultural and integral values (along with their integral laws and their also associated political, economic, and educational systems). In today’s postmodern, commercial, relativist values all of this seems impossible and unrealistic but adaptation to survive is paramount and “wild cards” like the official disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence may instigate our collective reformulation.


Regarding various hypotheses of “easy” world-wide human transformation (circulating among pluralistic, idealist, retro-romantics and among some “interdimensionally open-minded,” but myth-prone individuals), I’m more of the opinion that the planetary-wide, personal and cultural transformations we really need to sustain in order to make it into the next stages of development will require hard, personal and collective efforts rather than (as is sometimes mentioned within the “New Age” Movement) the simple automatic reception or “alignment” with a “higher 4th dimensional” (or 5th dimensional) “vibrations,” “information patterns” or “higher energies” stemming perhaps (along with the beginning of a new, more inclusive cycle in the evolutionary spiral) from the galactic core, the “Central Sun” or another evolution-promoting source. In fact, I don’t discard all channeled transmissions or New Age messages since they may also reflect an integrative opening to higher levels of being but, if there’s any truth to this “ascension process” (some of which has also been apparently “received” by credible contactees and abductees) I still don’t think that our deepest awakening and-or transformation achievements will be given to us on a “silver plate.” We will also have to earn them and to creatively participate in the co-creation of a more integral planetary culture truly capable of living in greater harmony with the Earth, respecting all its creatures and feeling comfortable with the practical scientific and spiritual recognition that indeed there are higher realms of being interacting with ours. Our personal ethics will also need to grow to the point of embracing all sentient beings while retaining our humanity and including the wisest of our old structures. We’ll need to deserve such an “ascension” and to outgrow our separate egos to learn to integrate our various… integrative efforts.


Into a Larger Assembly
In the past, when civilizations (like the Maya) collapsed, any survivors left behind always had a place to move into or there was a culture at hand to assimilate them. In many cases niches were available for civilizations to move into and express their uniqueness because (on a planetary-wide scale) there still was plenty of space left.  But today there’s no-where else to move into except – for the most part - within ourselves in order to seek how to re-create our exterior life expressions. We are being forced to change in order to adapt to our new conditions. Even if we were technologically capable of moving off-planet we would simply carry on our primeval practices unchanged and inimical to a space-faring civilization and would thus re-create new forms of the same inner conflicts. To facilitate change in this lack of transactional “planetary space” we would need an extremely profound new logical vision consistent with perceiving the planet as a whole and but contained within a more inclusive level of the Cosmos. In fact (as XX Century maverick logician Kurt Gödel2 would have probably concurred), to relate with our complex, planetary-wide, state of affairs both (intelligently and consistently) we may need to perceive or envision ourselves as part of an even larger “assembly” or “whole;” one including and transcending the inadequate perspectives proper to being circumscribed to a finite (and once seemingly unending) territory of cultural meaning. This “larger assembly” or “larger whole” (our new reference frame) would function even beyond the way in which classical physical perspectives correlate with our physical senses.


Developing paradigm-connecting principles today, some integral visionaries (like Edgar Morin, Ken Wilber, Basarab Nicolescu, and Ervin Laszlo) are at the forefront of our (still largely unconscious) collective crusade to discover a more complete form of integralism capable of accommodating all kinds of knowledge. Moreover, non-standard, integrative ideas in quantum physics (like David Bohm’s, John Archibald Wheeler’s, John Cramer’s, Yakir Aharonov’s and -more recently and audaciously- Claude Swanson’s and Edgar Mitchell’s) and integrative ideas pertaining to mystical and esoteric models (like those of visionaries Sri Aurobindo, H.P. Blavastky and Rudolph Steiner) may all possess crucial elements that –if carefully understood - could combine more adequately and under the much grander integral vision what we must strive to acquire. I called the aforementioned scientific and esoteric thinkers “integrative” because, instead of combining all areas of knowledge into truly universal theories, they still privileged either the materialist or the spiritualist-idealist understandings. In other words, they were “integral” but only to a point and mostly still privileging a major aspect of manifest Life without combining all its main aspects.


Ken Wilber may be one of the few Meta theorists that has lucidly accommodated (with the exception of the transdimensional, the inter-realm, the “paranormal”) most of the main aspects of knowledge and experience (the subjective, objective, intersubjective and interobjective). However, he is still held back by an irrational series of exclusions rejecting other integrative efforts, privileging postmodern constructionism and psychological development tending to  pontificate.  His AQAL map is capable of integrating much more and even what he prefers to ignore (like the quantum connections with the Subtle Realm) is already implicit in it. 


However, from now on, in order to develop a civilization capable of understanding how extraterrestrials think and operate and, in order to participate with them as intellectual equals (at least under a basic, shared understanding) we need to integrate the integralist models (including Integral Theory) into a larger whole, assembling science, retrocausality, consciousness, metaphysics, holography, different understandings about “evolution,” involution, cosmology, spiritualism, idealism, metaphysics, philosophy and every other form of knowledge within a much broader and ever-improving, open-ended, Integral comprehensive model. To start with, not only the soft sciences and the hard ones need to be included under an integrative, academic model but we must begin to understand how these relate. Moreover, an important aspect of this relation is about how different realms of being express their subjective and objective aspects differentially and, thus, can interact.


Was an “Educational Period” Led by Benevolent ETs Possible?


I believe that the turning point in which our modern and pre-modern, piecemeal and exclusivist habits were supposed to give rise both to a more “holistic” and then to an “integrative” (and eventually “integral”) way of being arose when human-generated systems became dysfunctionally able to destroy most of our planet’s life-sustaining ecology. This turning point probably coincided with the moment in history when in 1947 the word “flying saucer” (after Kenneth Arnold’s publicized sighting over the Cascade Mountain Range) became a cultural meme and when news of an extraterrestrial vehicle crash in Roswell, NM became news while cover-up procedures were strengthened. I coincide with Dr. Michael E. Salla3 that “Exopolitics” (as a recognized, cultural-political, democratic concern and academic field of inquiry) should have begun in earnest back then. It was a moment in history when we should have gradually begun to reassess more consciously and widely as a species who we were. That “moment” probably took place during WWII or soon thereafter, along with the Roswell incident and with the production of weapons of mass destruction. It coincided with the emergence of the “Modern UFO Era” and –soon thereafter- with the alleged offer (by an Earth-human-respectful cluster of –for the most part- human-looking extraterrestrials) of a gradual, worldwide, educational process on spiritual, universal “cosmic principles.”


These were the times of contactees surreptitiously stimulating a peculiar alternative awareness about reality, mainly into the highly influential United States and before the precarious consolidation of many incipient democracies in Africa and other continents. These were the times of contactees like George Adamski, Howard Menger, Frank Stranges, Truman Bethurum, Orfeo Angelucci, Daniel Fry, Dana Howard, Gloria Lee, Buck Nelson, George King, George Van Tassel and many others like them ostensibly befriending human-looking extraterrestrials and attempting first to transmit basic spiritual, esoteric and metaphysical outlines. These were also the times of some other alleged contactees in other culturally-interesting parts of the world, people like Bruno Sammaciccia of the “Amicizia case” (perhaps having friendly, “down-to-earth” contacts in Italy) and Dino Kraspedon in Brazil.


But why would metaphysical, mystical, spiritual “platitudes” be transmitted? Can platitudes change the modern world? Why would intelligent, “hypermodern,” technologically advanced extraterrestrials contact –non-politically influential and non-academically inclined- individuals to transmit what perhaps “realistic,” “rational,” modern people and authorities would simply dismiss with ridicule, triviality or disgust as “swindles, fantasies or useless platitudes?” Well, perhaps because they were trying to gently stimulate collective interest (especially in the subconscious, imaginal level) on the creation of integrative models through which those metaphysical, ungrounded, fevered-minded “platitudes” could be gradually re-interpreted into practical, scientific, cultural developments eventually capable of coalescing a “holistically mature” or incipiently “integral” civilization. This type of civilization (understanding the patterns behind qualitative and quantitative experiences) would, in turn, be capable of relating more intelligently with the respectful, “space-faring” civilizations instigating it. From simply deciding with free will to personally risking curiosity at elements of child-like, simple metaphysical “principles” the first kernels of a major rainfall would begin to coalesce.  


In other words, a viable, integral transformation fit for a planetary and interplanetary society might first require simple, innocent curiosity and spontaneous, virtuous, personal interest, from run-of the-mill individuals for the natural course of human cultural evolution not to be defeated or imposed upon. It would not be imposed or handed out if we are to develop our own unique cosmic voice in the Cosmos. The desire to know must be intimately born, personal curiosity. However, this also requires the possibility of denying it all as a fantasy and explains why the ET presence is not only strange but also elusive and therefore easy to dismiss. However, a simple official government acknowledgement (even if withholding advanced ET technology for security reasons) of its reality might have gone a long way to inspire further integrative efforts and to initiate a natural cultural transformation as an adaptive response.


I do understand that, right after WWII and in the midst of a “Cold War” opening up too much to the guidance of an extraterrestrial group –however benevolent they might seem- would have been practically impossible. Nonetheless, perhaps even a minimal, friendly acceptance would have gone a long way in the long run setting up in motion naturally arising, cultural transformative events. Nowadays, even if the “educational period” seems to have been officially rejected and-or postponed, it also seems that by means of normal social and cultural processes (non-overtly influenced by ET presences) some of its key aspects may -after all- be emerging under integrative (not yet “integral”) “post postmodern,” Meta theories and social movements, like Integral Theory and Exopolitics. They are nascent and maturing where people are naturally developing multi-paradigmatic attitudes or sensibilities and where thinking people are beginning to ask for ways that recognize deeper levels of meaning replacing either-or metaphysical solutions, modern reductionism and excessive relativist pluralism. Self-organizing systems theories, cybernetics, evidence of life after death, presentiment, retrocausality, zero-point physics, transdisciplinarity, Integral Theory, even alternative political systems, economies and religious and mystical interpretations, all play into the mix, each in an integrative (not yet fully “integral”) manner.


Perhaps people are not that obtuse mostly need explanations of a deeper, connecting knowledge that makes sense. Perhaps gradually coming to recognize multi-paradigm-connecting principles earlier would have served to speed up social and cultural evolution worldwide. However, perhaps we can still do it today. Perhaps by validating contactees in the 1950’s many biasedly discarded metaphysical discoveries connected with previous dominant stages (nature spirits, celestial realms) would have been re-integrated into rational modernity, egalitarian post-modernity and ulterior stages for an integral culture to emerge sooner. Perhaps this quickening of developmental stages would have facilitated a deeper form of ecumenical understanding world-wide through which they would have found more reasons to respect each other’s religions. The religiously-inclined would still found support for their need to identify with a genuine divine reality and order rather than feeling invalidated by scientifist-materialist pragmatists or by deconstructive-relativist postmodernists. Now, by means of increasing evidence for all kinds of otherworldly realities (found by also partly integrative researchers) perhaps more scientific and academically-minded “integratives” will feel inclined to recognize the missing pieces of the puzzle in their respective models.     


Dualistic Discomforts Preventing Knowledge


Maybe different expressions of discomfort with diverse types of “otherworldly” events have been constant in most Earth individuals throughout recorded and non-recorded history. Maybe this discomfort underscored all levels of cultural development in different ways. This seems to be a serious problem that we need to overcome even now that integrative models are arising and that we need to intelligently relate with extraterrestrial “visitors” using all adequate means available to understand our interactions with them. This also seems to be a crucial problem seriously preventing us as a species from knowing who we are. Only integrative minds within the New Age and esoteric movements seem to intuitively accept this idea but integrative minds favoring academic approaches still tend to atavistically reject it. Quite often in the past (even when belief in the otherworldly was part of a community’s worldview) our gods and deities often “exploited us” or during our theocratic stages we allowed our lofty interpretations of (even benign) spiritual beings to impose repressive and exploitative social orders on others. Later on, to be “modern” and “rational,” meant not accepting any evidence for the otherworldly which was simply ridicules, dismissed and suppressed. In other words, we’ve probably had an uneasy relation with the otherworldly throughout our developmental history.


In relation to UFOs and ETs, a convergence of evidence that would be accepted under a court of law is simply dismissed mostly because it FEELS preposterous. Even individuals accepting some aspects of the “otherworldly” tend to dismiss it when other aspects are insinuated to them. Tallying other “elements of the whole picture” seems to be more than what they can handle. It is not rational; it is not scientific. It is not integral, but we sorely need to understand this limitation and acquire knowledge and experience that can overcome it.  


For Disclosure to be more effectively guided by exopoliticians, I think we’ll need to open up to what I call the “Tri Realm Otherworldly,” a general understanding of a multi-leveled, intelligently organized (we could even say “living”) Kosmos populated by a great variety of spiritual and extraterrestrial entities with whom we have related and still relate. It is a major upset to our parochial sense of reality but – as exopoliticians - it behooves us to work with it.


We won’t understand extraterrestrials able to “travel” “transdimensionally” and to temporarily operate among us in enigmatic ways unless we get a sense of how the Kosmos operates affecting and sustaining the physical level from beyond. However, even at this point in our minimal collective development regarding these matters, I support Disclosure because I think that it will induce us into collectively thinking more seriously about who we are than what religions, scientists, most cultural leaders can or are willing to. In fact, Disclosure would likely stimulate an interest to find answers and to combine what today are barely influential (and for most, even boring) integrative models.


By using many of the valuable findings within Integral Theory I’ll attempt to advance a more integral way to understand the Kosmos, one in which the “otherworldly” is again significant; but reasonably understood so that it promotes further growth and freedom.


More Inclusivity for Exopolitical Reality


Exopolitics is an interdisciplinary scientific field, with its roots in the political sciences, that focuses on research, education and public policy with regard to the actors, institutions and processes, associated with extraterrestrial life, as well as the wide range of implications this entails through public advocacy and newly emerging paradigms.


Exopolitics is an inclusive, integrative endeavor that incorporates the methods of the social and empirical sciences as well as reasonable evidence such as ufological research and analysis, official documents, whistleblower testimonies and experiencer testimonies. Exopolitics is about the many cultural, scientific, legal, political, spiritual implications of the (actual or possible) extraterrestrial presence. Exopolitics also deals with our political attitudes and responses to that (actual or possible) extraterrestrial presence. 
Exopoliticians should at least be informed of the scientific and technological advances and on the latest models on what the nature of reality may be like to permit distances to be collapsed and to overcome inertia. It also seeks to develop a gradual, cautious, well-grounded understanding of the “politics” among space-faring civilizations, of “who’s who” among them, of the role of consciousness, and (in my view, in order to develop an intelligent interaction with extraterrestrial presences) of how multiple physical and non-physical realities might relate. Exopolitics would thus “cross-pollinate” or be interdisciplinary with fields not limited to the social sciences. It would be available to orthodox and non-orthodox and cutting-edge scientific explanations and, besides that, to the possible genetic and historical-cultural influence of extraterrestrial civilizations in our past. In other words, the field is quite “integrative” and may require an integrative model (like the fairly developed “Integral Theory”) to incorporate more under method and be enriched.


Further Inclusivity for Integral Theory
“Integral theory is an all-inclusive framework that draws on the key insights of the world’s greatest knowledge traditions. The awareness gained from drawing on all truths and perspectives allows the Integral thinker to bring new depth, clarity and compassion to every level of human endeavor — from unlocking individual potential to finding new approaches to global-scale problems.” (Integral Institute Opening Statement at http://www.integralinstitute.org/ )


“The word integral means comprehensive, inclusive, non-marginalizing, embracing. Integral approaches to any field attempt to be exactly that: to include
as many perspectives, styles, and methodologies as possible within a coherent view of the topic. In a certain sense, integral approaches are “meta-paradigms,” or ways to draw together an already existing number of separate paradigms into an interrelated network of approaches that are mutually enriching.” (Ken Wilber’s “Foreword” in Frank Visser’s : Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion (2003)).


In a nutshell (leaving out much), by recognizing the “elements” of four fundamental and mutually irreducible quadratic expressions or perspectives (the subjective, intersubjective, objective and inter-objective) occurring in every event we can experience and then that what the particular these perspectives contain advance in levels or stages of sequential development and complexity, also  manifesting “lines” or specific “capacities” or intelligent organization and interaction, plus “states”  and “typologies,” we generate a basic five-element “matrix” called “AQAL.”  It can assist us in organizing how we perceive “reality” and in appreciating all knowledge accumulated by humanity as a whole.  It implies an inclusive view in which all valid knowledge is seen as true but partial and also implies that each quadratic perspective uses different methods and that our subjective capacity to appreciate different discoveries or partial truths revealed by these methods depends on our own level of development. Thus, integralists using AQAL tend to use many of the findings of developmental psychologists to emphasize that understanding and ethical embrace depend on level of personal development. However, we can also speak of cultural levels, social and technological interconnected systems levels and levels of physical complexity in individual objects. The problem with this emphasis is that it can lead to a form of hubris and to reject (for instance as inappropriate to scientific knowledge) currently useful, integrally useful findings of contemporary and-or bygone eras.


An important feature of an integral understanding is the perception of life organized in hierarchies that do not privilege vertical superiority-inferiority or horizontal equality. They include both. These hierarchies would be called “holons” which would be simultaneously complete and incomplete perceived structures with a tendency to extend themselves (to become more complete or inclusive) by becoming parts of even larger holons. They would be simultaneous “wholes” and “parts” to which AQAL’s “five elements” apply. In other words, after the postmodern emphasis on equality and excessive questioning of certainties and authority (a normal part of the evolution of human consciousness in humanity, individuals and cultures coming after the rational-modern emphasis on classical logic which itself came after a long period of reliance on myth) a natural hierarchical order is perceived affecting every quadratic perspective.


One of the characteristics of this understanding is the attitude that people from all levels of development using any number of methods to “enact” and interpret aspects of what is “real” can all be at least partially right and this attitude of inclusion is unique in the history of humanity. This post postmodern understanding will be necessary to deal with the complex systemic problems arising in today’s world in which humans centered at different “altitudes” or basic levels of development share the same physically effective social and technological power basis. Thus, in order to save the world, the “Integral Movement” is a multidisciplinary attempt to educate and to promote the emergence of more individuals and leaders capable of this understanding through using the Integral Model.}


My understanding is that, in spite the correctness of these ideas, since the founders of the movement are embedded in an academic culture they also tend to ignore valid findings in alternative fields with their own integrative elements (such as exopolitics) that show the operation of many non-local and psychic aspects of reality currently challenging orthodox science. This is why I claim that Integral Theory and its theorists need to come to grips with these phenomena in order to remain relevant and not to suppress a more general integral advancement of knowledge and culture. 

A good overview of Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory/AQAL can be found at: http://integrallife.com/node/37539


Touching/Converging “Shadows”


Sometimes when two dark interference bands intersect, light reappears. In Ken Wilber’s work we can read an overview of the pathologies that can occur when we “disown” aspects of our selves and turn to impersonal (distant, third person) explanations to project outside us what we are unwilling to see within.4 This can also occur as we pass from one individual developmental stage to another. Extrapolated to whole civilizations made up of individual centers of consciousness, perhaps some ET civilizations which (according to exopolitical research) have serious atrophies and other grave difficulties (even if they are currently “advanced” in the sense of working with elements of a transdimensional knowledge that –for instance- allows them to “travel” in space) didn’t quite accept all of what being “integral” entailed when it was time for them (like it is time for us now) to transition into the “integral” awareness required to create a healthy space-faring planetary culture. Perhaps some of them eventually lost certain types of feelings, emotions or sentiment and other qualities proper to their original, essential natures. Since we might be going in the same developmental direction (engrossed in technological development without sufficient interior development) perhaps these affinities gives them (besides some of them intervening in the seeding of humanity) a certain “right” to interact with us in order to obtain some benefits even if some of them do it in an aggressive, conscious free will-violating manner. Thus, perhaps our “shadows” (our suppressed denials) converge and need to meet if we deny them an easy way out into healing.


Then again, perhaps other ET civilizations that respect conscious free will without deceptions and operate under loftier spiritual principles also want to “get” something from us but more as keen observers of the selfless examples we also frequently give, even when living under dismal, soul-limiting conditions. Perhaps these other ETs want to understand or to experience our most sublime sentiments in order to reach states of consciousness and understanding that may allow them to move beyond their current levels of existence and to open connections to the highest “dimensions” or realms (or their sub-levels and combinatorial subsets), ceasing to be physical extraterrestrials and become “masters of wisdom” or “celestials” capable of traversing all levels of Creation. In both cases, we might be able to provide “missing pieces of the puzzle” to ET civilizations which, even if operating “transdimensionally” (and thus at least “integrally” in a cognitive manner) in an advanced technological fashion (for our standards), may be lack the capacity to express some Life elements readily available in previous stages of cultural evolution.


A Cosmic ABC
We urgently need a shared understanding of how the entire Kosmos is organized and Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory in its current stage would possess some of the elements of a beginner’s “Cosmic ABC” necessary to build a much vaster scientific and metaphysical Integral Knowledge. By perhaps being able to accommodate an infinite variety of perspectives under its “Five Elements” and its general guidelines, Integral Theory may also help us to harmoniously connect with as many perspectives as possible. Exposing ourselves to Integral Theory would remind us not only of how the Kosmos is – at least in part - structured and, therefore, be “psychoactive” assisting us  to develop a greater participatory empathy and togetherness for the common good.


Many partially adequate “theories of everything” have been devised under what seemed to be mutually contradictory, premises and while -theoretically speaking- some “pieces of the puzzle” have been found, exclusivisms remained. Now we can develop an outstanding connective vision; (not just unsuspectingly “integrative” and predisposed against other integrative theories) but truly “integral.” This vision has to transcend the concept of “paradigms” only as “worldviews” to include the specific reality-disclosing methods or practices sustaining the world views. As Ken Wilber reminds us (in “Excerpt D,” Eye to Eye and Integral Spirituality), this may have been what philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn originally had in mind when he spoke about “exemplars” as paradigmatic instances of research.


Exopolitics (as a scientific, academic field that deals with the implications of the extraterrestrial presence), could be enriched by Integral Theory. This would mean that the principles and patterns of this theory (or rather Meta theory) are universal enough to be applied in a content-free manner to any other field of inquiry. It would also be capable of unveiling the common order behind quantitative and qualitative approaches. Integral Theory may already be comprehensive enough to assist exopoliticians in some valuable ways to connect their field in an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary manner with other integrative and non-integrative fields. In the same vein, Integral Theory can be enriched by the implications and paradigmatic developments and the integral attitude offered by serious exopolitical researchers and activists. This is a time for integrating integrative approaches. Any mutual exclusion would be imposed by the irrational need to establish the influence and recognition of one’s preferred field at the expense of other compatible fields which superficially SEEM to compete or contradict ours.


Anyhow, Integral Theory can also be understood as a “model” or as a “matrix” eventually representing a philosophically advanced understanding of how Non-Dual Consciousness (remaining independent but acting as if embedded in its apparent Kosmos) hierarchically manifests relative expressions of duality. How Consciousness does it would be evidenced (at least in part) by the integral pattern.


Integral Theory (which certainly needs improving) was mostly assembled by self-taught philosopher, mystic, and transpersonal psychology thinker Ken Wilber and represents a coherent attempt to incorporate (among other things) the findings of different non-dual mystical traditions, classic rational philosophy, modern and postmodern philosophy, elements of the perennial philosophy, systems theory, Arthur Koestler’s concept of “HOLONS,” developmental psychology, evolutionary biology, scientific empirical methods, hermeneutics, phenomenology and constructionism. The result of looking at all of this with a “bird’s eye” or simultaneous, “gestalt” view was the discovery of some of the basic patterns apparently organizing the Kosmos. A good explanation of how this came to be can be found by reading Ken Wilber’s Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution (or SES).


Besides “SES” and other important books like The Atman Project, A Brief History of Everything, Integral Psychology and Integral Spirituality, Wilber’s “excerpts” (erudite, academic discussions reconsidering crucial issues for today’s philosophy) are an online compendium of many of his ideas and can be retrieved at www.kenwilber.com


Toward Integration


Integrative approaches attempt to relate quantitative and qualitative knowledge, perspectives and methods pertaining to the realms of body, mind and spirit. While Integral Theory may at first seem too complex, the model itself can be simplified into some general guiding principles and into “Five Elements” which –after a moderate learning effort- make it cognitively palatable. However, incorporating Integral Theory into our self-identities in accordance with its corresponding more inclusive, ethical values possibly requires a post sociocentric, post rational (not to be confused with ‘non-rational’) and post ultra-egalitarian/postmodern level of consciousness. This would be a trans-rational, whole being aperture to a level of understanding that connects paradigms. It would even be a post-worldcentric perspective transcending, relating and including previous ideological dichotomies, for instance, between exoteric religious doctrines or competing philosophical preferences (like idealism, vs. materialism). Similarly to (deceased) Emeritus Professor Archie J. Bahm’sOrganicism,” (whose work I also highly recommend) Integral Theory accepts the essential positive assertions about reality but rejects each other’s negations. Integral Theory accepts that everybody is (at least partially) right. Many of its proponents (apparently including Wilber) are “integral” in that sense but remain as “integralists” when irrationally excluding from serious consideration the non-ordinary, otherworldly-related metaphysical findings of previous cultural stages.


Integral Theory delves into Non-Dual mysticism (and this is one of the reasons why it is itself excluded from a biased academic environment). However, it is also an example of the use of classical “either-or” logic rigorously. It doesn’t eliminate this logic but transcends and includes it using a high degree of “rational thought.” This is what post postmodern inclusivity is about. Furthermore, in my view, Integral Theory also makes use (in a less defined/less obvious way) of an even more inclusive and relational, “both-and” logic (capable of including as a subset the classical “either-or” logic) but may also transcend and include it and may connect with a “neither-nor” logic that eventually leads to the suspension of comparative thinking and to the ultimate source of meaning where the model itself is ultimately grounded: In Godly Non-Dual Spirit. 
Wilber calls the post-formal cognition necessary for an integral awareness “vision logic” (or “network logic”) which, according to philosopher Jean Gebser is also supposed to be “integral-aperspectival” (without privileging any perspective exclusively) and to be a predisposition to include all perspectives.“Vision logic” is supposed to be a cross-paradigmatic, cognitive capacity in which we accept multiple paradigms not purely relativistically but with an incipient perception of their connectedness in a pattern. I think that the level of logic that makes “vision-logic” possible is the “both-and” logic of complementary or mutually necessary relations. I think that “vision-logic” may depend on the human capacity to connect exterior events as non-essential, something which a deep level of our consciousness (as a third person “witness”) observes without becoming caught as an experiencer. Borrowing from Spiral Dynamics (which assigns colors to more or less inclusive values), an initial integral form of understanding operating with vision-logic is currently represented in Integral Theory by the teal color.


 “Vision logic” may be a crucial first stage necessary to live on the planet developing a more harmonious, integral civilization also beginning to relate with an intelligent “Kosmos” as one family. “Vision-logic” would not be an experiential factor of an incipient “holism” in which rationality is sometimes “retro-romantically” demeaned in favor of a pre-rational, undifferentiated, unitary understanding or in which differences are flattened in favor of an absolute pluralist equality and (in order to counter-act scientific reductionism) even of the apparent prevalence of wholes over parts. “Vision-logic” accompanies a post, postmodern form of “mature holism” in which hierarchies (under unifying guiding principles) are re-accepted without justifying forms of interpersonal social abuse.


Under this “mature holism” we aren’t simple of equal value in a flat, horizontal or heterarchical way. We are distributed in form and function into patterns formed by greater or lesser inclusive wholes. Experientially, we function as parts of wholes which can also be parts of larger wholes. The ancient dream of a natural order under “spiritual laws” is undertaken once again but this time (hopefully) in a non-exclusivist manner by acknowledging the truths of all “pre-integral” stages and embracing an open-ended understanding.
Wilber seems to claim that “vision-logic” and-or a certain level of cognitive and general development is necessary to understand his model and this (which might or might not be true)  has endeared him to criticisms of thinking in circular terms. He has been poignantly and intelligently criticized by Jeff Meyerhoff for not engaging in proper debates and for not putting to the test his “vision logic” under a rational debate.7 While I agree with some of Meyerhoff’s criticisms about some of Wilber’s academic procedures (for instance, sometimes collecting supportive academic research while leaving out contradicting opinions) and his lack of engagement in debate with non-supportive scholars (which, at least, in my view, doesn’t seem to be as noticeable as expected), I think that “vision logic” is capable of using a “both-and” logic of complementarities and relations which can subsume the formal logic used in what Meyerhoff calls a “rational debate.” As previously mentioned, I think that “vision-logic” is not just a psychological perception or a way to justify any belief but is capable of using formal, “either-or” logic and “both-and” logic in a rigorous manner. Thus, I think that the general patterns of Wilber’s model could be perfectly defended if he wanted to make the effort.   


Towards a New Polis


Wilber seems to think that in today’s world perhaps about 4%-5% of the planetary population (supposedly only those transcending a holistic, “green,” “pluralistic” understanding) may be (as First Person, feeling beings and not just cognitively) functioning at the emerging, “teal,” integral stage8 Also, Wilber (based on roughly coinciding studies of human development researchers like James Mark Baldwin, Jean Gebser, Jane Loevinger, Clare Graves, Jean Piaget, Abraham Maslow, Lawrence Kohlberg, Daniel Goleman, Robert Kegan, James Fowler, Carol Gilligan and Suzanne Cook-Greuter) thinks that the “integral stage” of individual and cultural structuring has a natural tendency to increase.9 Moreover, according to Wilber if approximately 10% of a given population reaches it, then legal, political, educational and economic systems will be set in place by its frontrunners to promote life under its guidelines…affecting how everyone else (even at lower stages of development) lives.10  Thus, the “Integral Movement” (usually associated with but not necessarily limited to the core “Wilberian” group in Boulder, Colorado, at “Integral Institute” and at “Meta Integral Foundation”) is a principled, integrally inspired attempt to educate and promote the emergence of “integral” levels of consciousness within society (in a local and planetary scale) in order to facilitate the rise of an integral electorate and of integral political leaders capable of installing “integral-level” laws and systems that would minimize the current destruction of life on Earth and promote a synergistic, planetary civilization. It is also an attempt to avert prospective social upheavals and-or social regressions brought about by the politics of a majority still imbued in ways of being and thinking inimical to our contemporary planetary reality. This means that Wilber is not simply an armchair philosopher but also an activist. However, he seems to be completely oblivious to the UFO/ET, exopolitical realities currently being discovered. His closest supporters also seem to follow the same pattern.


I think that that 10% transformational, “integral” segment of humanity should (by definition) proactively participate in the global awakening toward intelligent inter planetary reality. Integral and-or integrative individuals must also cease isolating unto themselves and cease being exclusively attached to the particular integrative aspects that resonated with them the most in relation to their particular theories or movements. To be genuinely integral they must recognize each other’s value and work synergistically for each other’s success as participant in a single movement.


As previously said, the way most societies individuals have related with each other until now under excessively insular attitudes and lack of trust toward each other is based on instinctive classical perceptions accompanying dichotomous “either-or” assumptions but -due to the non-linearity of the systems we have created- that way of being is no longer viable.  We must have a different way ingrained in us and potentially waiting to come out. That way must be truly integral.


In the time being, individuals at least thinking under integrative patterns must at least find ways to coordinate policies which are more harmonious in non-linear, complex social systems. A short commentary in Wikipedia referring to the term “Polytely” is pertinent to this notion: 
Polytely (from Greek roots meaning 'many goals') can be described as complex problem-solving situations characterized by the presence of multiple simultaneous goals.
Modern societies face an increasing incidence of various complex problems. In other words, the defining characteristics of our complex problems are a large number of variables (complexity) that interact in a nonlinear fashion (connectivity), changing over time (dynamic and time-dependent), and to achieve multiple goals (polytely).” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytely


In other words, self-defensive insularity is “out” and, thus, an extreme or exclusive focus on a single field of knowledge and praxis (however integrative) is out. “Our” field will embrace and relate with all other knowledge-conveying fields for which there is repeated first person (subjective), second person (intersubjective) and third person (objective and inter objective) evidence. Our attachment to a classical “either-or” logic will give way to a practical understanding that logic itself derives from or is a subset of a more inclusive “both-and” logic which can also be rigorous (but relate more with subtle, spiritual realities) and which is in turn a subset of an eventually mind-transcending “neither-nor” logic.


Inclusivity is “in” but there must be order and method in the connectivity and not a simple “feels good” emotional holism. This order implies organized order or hierarchy. In fact, the search for order and method can be done in various ways. For instance, multidisciplinarily (using the methods and findings of different fields to research or practice something), interdisciplinarily (using the methods and findings of other fields to enhance how we research or practice within our field) and transdisciplinarily (using patterns which transcend but are common to different fields in order to research or practice something while coordinating various fields more effectively). In the latter case, different fields of knowledge and praxis can also be understood as particular expressions of an underlying or more profound knowledge and way of being. Some theories of everything (or ‘constructs’ or ‘models’)” (including scientific ones like “M-Theory” and esoteric ones like “Theosophy”) have been attempts to represent that knowledge but –as previously mentioned- most haven’t been inclusive enough of the main aspects of “reality.” Most have focused on an important aspect and extended it to the whole.


I think that we need now more than ever a growing crew of exopoliticians who care for philosophy and science and non-duality as much as philosophers and scientists and non-dualists that care for Exopolitics. While many exopoliticians (basically concerned with the extraterrestrial presence and its implications) may have found the latest developments in philosophy of little allure or practical relevance, many caring psychologist-activist-egalitarians typically discovering Integral Theory as an important, emerging, intellectual, political movement may have mistakenly, superficially and dismissively judged Ufology and Exopolitics as too related with various “pre-rational” (not post- rational), “New Age” and “mythical” approaches from which they tried not to associate with in order to establish their own “non-orthodox” foothold in the hypercritical academic and institutional worlds. Now the imperative for integralists (and for implementing the possibility of establishing a mutually beneficial, respectful and high-level exchange with cosmic civilizations) is to find a shared, institutions-transforming basis for sustaining a “good life” (something often called “El Buen Vivir” in traditional enclaves of the Andes). This would ideally be a conscious, synergistic relation with the living planet, with all of its living entities, with humanity and with all sentience in the Kosmos as a coherent whole. To intelligently participate in the kosmic community of worlds we have to do it as integrated and ethical entities capable of caring for within our planet a whole in order to transcending Earth’s concerns. 


Three Strands for an Experimental Exopolitics


Perhaps fitting new paradigms into old paradigms is one of the incongruences in the search for a clearer approach to understand the validity of alleged messages from otherworldly beings. What may be missing are the procedures or methods that accompany a different way of thinking and its values. Changing our worldviews would not be sufficient to begin an open “exopolitical age.” We would also need new methods that accompany the new worldviews in the sense that Thomas Kuhn included techniques and practices in his concept of “paradigms.” As previously said, according to Wilber, "Paradigms" (in the original Kuhnian sense) aren't just worldviews but also entire ways of being and enacting or producing/extracting meaning which include “injunctions” or the specific practices or procedures used.11  The new exopolitical worldview would also need its own injunctions, methods or practices. 


Exopolitics needs a mature, integral holism. Being “holistic” in a “mature,” “integral” way is more than a return to oriental or shamanic worldviews and practices. It’s more than simply accepting everyone’s truths. It is more than creating a new culture guided by a “quantum holographic” paradigm. It is about how qualitative approaches and methods can be used along with quantitative approaches and methods under a subjacent TRANSDISCIPLINARY multi-realm model based on principles coordinating these approaches. A sufficiently inclusive, integral model would be accompanied by specific, enacting methods applicable to a specific expression (or perspective) of reality. Furthermore, an integration of old and new methods would have to be devised to manifest/enact, interpret and relate with the levels of existence extraterrestrials exist in along with the methods applicable to the specific perspectives under which they could manifest.
After decades of research we know that ET contact experiences are usually accompanied by powerful psychic, inter-realm or otherworldly components. These interactions possess a “high strangeness” in which the boundaries between our ordinary linear reality and “something else” are blurred. How can we research these events more objectively in an integral sense? How can we be scientific and simultaneously be metaphysical, spiritual and psychic?


“Ufologists” denying contacteeism and psychic interaction have normally limited themselves to classical, impersonal “objective” research and reporting but – if Exopolitics is able to include all available forms of evidence - at least some exopoliticians could conduct active, ET contact empirical research which might be considered “objective.” Following Ken Wilber's "Three strands of good science (applicable to quantitative and qualitative research)" involving instrumental injunction, direct apprehension and communal confirmation or rejection, 12  if we want to follow the general advice of modern and post-modern thinkers and thus find a foothold within an acceptable academic procedure (which in my view is also applicable to non-conventional, multi-realm research) I'd suggest the following: To more objectively research "otherworldly" contact experiences we might get a group of individuals, train them to experience the non-physical Subtle Realm (or also other coherent physical systems) using methods proven to elicit specific phenomena. Then, those seriously trained with this method would collectively apply it and attempt to obtain the empirical data revealed by those methods. Finally, this community would perform a serious hermeneutical review of what each individual was able to disclose or experience. If they truthfully were to agree in their observations then that could be considered as sufficiently verified collective empirical (and thus “objective”) information.  While individual research and experiences may reveal objective information, collectively disclosed information would be more acceptable under a combination of modern and postmodern standards. Following Karl Popper's advice that scientifically acceptable knowledge should be “falsifiable”13 (meaning that there are should exist ways to prove it incorrect). This might be a way to try to find out “more “scientifically”) if what channelers, mediums, telepaths, contactees, abductees, near-death-experiencers, astral projectors and other otherworldly experiencers bring up as information is valid, partially valid or invalid.


Connecting the Dots


I do appreciate the “connecting the dots” approach to Exopolitics by Paola Harris. She presents a wide variety of ostensibly sincere testimonies which may refer to equally genuine events and for which readers may make up their minds, perhaps eventually helping them to “connect the dots.” The many qualitative aspects of the extraterrestrial presence surpass (but do not eliminate) the modern-rational, Ufological, physicalist approach and, since all of these aspects recur (at least) since the beginning of the “Modern UFO Era” in the 1940’s, all of them should –even as consistent human experiences- be respected and acknowledged. There is also the crucial issue not only of the personal psychology of UFO-ET witnesses and-or experiencers, but of the role of consciousness itself as skillfully brought up by Dr. Rebecca Hardcastle, Dr. John Mack and other capable individuals (including contact experiencers). There are also crucial issues that focus more on the Earthly political responses (mostly cover-up related) to various kinds of ET presences; responses deserving the development of exopolitical research methods (including seven degrees of “evidentiary strength” assigned to different types of mutually reinforcing or undermining sources of information) as fittingly indicated by Dr. Michael E. Salla14 and which – I insist - should not exclude “hard” scientific evidence so as to focus more on “soft” evidence based on the social science methods.


Moreover, there’s the crucial issue of who’s who among extraterrestrials; what could the “laws” governing the galactic community (or communities) be and how might our particular exopolitical role as a planetary civilization fit in the large scheme of things as Alfred L. Webre attempts to disclose through his intersubjective valuations of alleged whistleblowers and experiencers. Furthermore, there are issues about the role of extraterrestrials in the development of historical and cultural traditions, for instance as researched by Dr. Thomas E. Bullard, not to speak of the political implications of a secret government cover-up and the inevitably progressing “Disclosure,” as carefully researched and intelligently pondered by Richard M. Dolan. Besides all of this, the issue of what may an appropriate citizens’ response be is a very important aspect of Exopolitics as represented by the activism of Dr. Steven Greer, Stephen Bassett, Don Berliner, Grant Cameron, Ed Komareck, and others like, perhaps, even billionaire Laurance Rockefeller. Additionally, the “zero-point,” and “interdimensional” physics apparently associated with the technology of genuine extraterrestrial vehicles and with the electric interference and “high strangeness” features of much alleged human-ET interaction probably evidencing transdimensional interaction (an interaction probably based upon using the timeless and space-less Mental/Psychic/Subtle/Astral Realm to “accommodate” or “tune” into a variety of physical spaces and timelines) also deserves exopolitical (and scientifically related) research and interest.   


Exopoliticians like Paola Harris15 craftily show us that –to start with- we need to open up to different explanations, to multiple perspectives on the why, what and how of exopolitical events. She shows us that there are many aspects in the UFO/ET world. For instance, why are there so many UFO sightings in Mexico? Is it due to energy grids? Is it due to previous Mayan priests having ET contacts? Is it perhaps due to a more flexible and receptive culture? Is it because it is the geopolitical link between the developed world and Latin America? I think that “all of the above” also is in many cases also a legitimate answer. Perhaps factors will converge to manifest a shared pattern. However, in order to actually “connect the dots” (rather than to simply know that we need to include them all); in order to make sense of the multi-dimensional or multi-trait complexity studied by Exopolitics, we need to use a current model useful to relate different areas of research. After writing “Extraterrestrial Contact and Integral Theory”16 for Exopolitics Journal (as a preliminary study on how to use Integral Theory to study contactee cases), I’m confident that Integral Theory is able of providing an initial all-purpose, cohering, multi-element, guiding framework.


Since Exopolitics and Integral Theory can both be understood as comprising academically useful, qualitative and quantitative approaches to a common form of knowledge they should be able to enrich and reinforce each other, especially if these approaches operate under the same basis and-or complement each other. While Exopolitics may allow integral theorists to recognize relevant issues without which they cannot truly claim to be “integral” in today’s world of emerging relevant integrative fields, Integral Theory may provide a useful framework to transdisciplinarily connect Exopolitics with other (integrative or pre-integrative) fields. 

Toward More Inclusive Exopolitical Definitions


Dr. E. Michael Salla defined “Exopolitics” as “the study of the key political actors, institutions and processes associated with extraterrestrial life” 17 Dr. Alfred Webre defined it as “the science of relations among intelligent civilizations in the Multiverse.”18 Paola L. Harris uses combined definitions like “the convergence of a new interdisciplinary science, an international political movement and a new paradigm, which all deal with the wide range of implications of extraterrestrial life” and “the study of contact and relations between humanity and extraterrestrial civilizations.”19 and Dr. Rebecca Hardcastle defined the exopolitically connected field of “Exoconsciousness” as “the study, practice and applications of the extraterrestrial origins, dimensions and abilities of human consciousness.”20


For me, the integrality of “Exopolitics” became obvious when in October, 2009 it was more formally consensually defined as “an interdisciplinary scientific field, with its roots in the political sciences, that focuses on research, education and public policy with regard to the actors, institutions and processes, associated with extraterrestrial life, as well as the wide range of implications this entails through public advocacy and newly emerging paradigm” and as “the convergence of a new interdisciplinary science, an international political movement and a new paradigm, which all deal with the wide range of implications of extraterrestrial life.”21 Thus -as a whole- Exopolitics promotes a respectable, multi-paradigmatic approach to deal with the reality of the extraterrestrial presence on Earth.


Perhaps non-scientific, but philosophically-inclined, postmodern minds tend to focus on the intersubjective creation of meaning and scientifically-inclined postmodern minds tend to focus on inter-objective (systems) thinking. Both are advances but they must connect. Integral Theory recognizes the integral unity of the subjective, objective, intersubjective and interobjective aspects of reality and demonstrates that they simultaneously co-arise. Michael Salla’s definition probably emphasizes the subjective, the objective and above all (as a political scientist) the inter-objective; Alfred Webre’s (highlighting conversations in human and ET relations) probably emphasizes the intersubjective or cultural aspect and Rebecca Hardcastle’s focus on consciousness emphasizes subjectivity and personal consciousness and -by extension- the Universal Non-Dual Consciousness which -in Integral Theory- is considered to be the utmost origin of the main four (“quadratic”) aspects, perspectives or expressions of what arises in reality. In other words, quite interestingly, these three important exopolitical definitions complement and supplement each other under the kind of integration underscored by Integral Theory. All of these definitions refer to important realms of disclosure but probably those definitions capable of incorporating more perspectives at once would generally be the more integral, balanced and capable of utilizing mutually-reinforcing evidence.   


If the ethical concerns of Integral Theory practitioners (typically white, middle class, Euro-American, humanistic and transpersonal psychology-inclined, academically-connected professionals, activists, consultants, ecologists and Eastern path explorers, often distinguishing themselves from New Age approaches) are beyond or deeper than a world-centric ethics and (by resonating with the integral, cosmic-level, transdisciplinary pattern) genuinely reach a “cosmocentric” stage, exopoliticians may also help them to unblock their awareness and to stimulate their interests toward integral the significance of the extraterrestrial presence. They might also open up more to other potentially life-transforming fields of inquiry also excessively found suspect of being “pre-rational” or “retro-romantic” confusions (fields like esoteric studies, mediumship, Instrumental Transcommunication and perhaps even quantum consciousness research). To be truly “integral” their “embrace of reality” will have to include not just the alternative, even if more academically-respected, non-dual, mystical traditions but also phenomena more which are directly connected with “Subtle Realm” (or Astral Realm) interactions and effects. Their ethical concerns have to embrace much more.


If Exopolitics and Integral Theory do synergistically reinforce each other this may gradually lead the advance of human knowledge into multi-dimensional, psychic and scientifically applicable developments. It should be said on behalf of Integral Theory and its official practitioners that many efforts (like those currently taking place at “Integral Institute,” at “Meta Integral Foundation” and at “Integral Ecology Center”) are being conducted to enhance established academic fields of knowledge like psychology, business, medicine and ecology, for instance producing “integral psychology,” “integral business,” “integral medicine” and “integral sustainability” and “integral ecology.” I may add that an “Integral Exopolitics” also is a plausible idea.


AQAL: Basic Elements of the Universal Matrix?
How can we define or investigate phenomena which we co-produce/enact/interpret? Integral Theory aims at providing answers. Integral Theory is also known under the acronym “AQAL” which denotes “All Quadrants, All Lines,” but also stands for three other key “Elements” which are called “Levels” “States” and “Types.”22 Thus, “AQAL” uses FIVE ELEMENTS to interpret experience and actually denotes “All Quadrants, All Lines, All Levels, All States, All Types” and, as an “integral matrix,” it presumably includes the minimum number of concepts necessary to unveil phenomena. The existence of other non-physical realms and bodies is acknowledged but a serious deficiency may be the lack of “elements” or concepts useful to understanding inter-realm phenomena. It often treats non-physical realities in a “post-metaphysical” way that restricts talking about them as real and capable of interaction with our physical universe.


AQAL is a model which –through its “quadrants”- incorporates the always presently arising in experience objective, psychological, cultural/intersubjective and inter-objective/systemic perspectives/aspects of reality and -as a Meta Theory (or theory about theories) - AQAL represents an ever-opening “cognitive space” where all previous (and forthcoming) qualitative and quantitative ways of unveiling human (and supposedly non-human) ways of being, experience and knowledge may be accommodated.
AQAL (and more obviously its “quadrants” element) may ultimately originate in the cosmic patterns that ensue when that Source of being which is beyond comparison and which has been called (among other names) “non-dual Spirit” “Being beyond being” “the Ground of all being,” “God the Absolute,” “Ain,” “Shunyatta,” “the ineffable Tao,”  “Wakan Tanka,”  “Parabrahm,” “Wujud Mutlaq” or, simply, “God”) creates and sustains (within his-her-it-its own ultimately unknowable Pure Being) the structurally organized, multidimensional, contingent-relative experiences of dependent beings under multiple levels of existence and under various degrees of the illusion of separation (duality).


As I see it, “duality” would be like a thought (about Being-non-being) in God’s ever transcending, non-dual Mind and it would generate chaos, separation, apparent exteriors and multiplicity plus a need for sentient beings to maintain a perspectival connection with the undifferentiated ultimate Source through the “Logos” or the Divine Intelligence overcoming the appearance of chaos. The divine radiance of Being (in contrast with non-being) would also maintain a connection with the undifferentiated under many levels of Physical, Subtle and Causal “energy” organized by His will. The ultimate level of radiance unaffected by creation (but nonetheless internally assisting it in its evolution by maintaining it connected with the divine order of the Logos) would correspond to what is called the “Holy Spirit.”


In the creative act the Non dual would imply “oneness,” which would imply duality which would generate Interiors, Exteriors, Singular and Collective “dimensions” which would combine to form four simultaneously arising quadratic perspectives (the subjective, objective, intersubjective and inter-objective). The oneness would be exemplified as the Causal Realm where interiors predominate over exteriors and exteriors end up being continuously nullified by a “neither-nor” logic because as exteriors they are inherently empty of reality. The duality would be exemplified by the Subtle Realm where interiors and exteriors (and the individual and collective) are co-equally important under a relational “both-and” logic. The quadratic perspectives (which cannot be reduced to each other but arise simultaneously in a dependent relation with the “dimensions” commanding the Subtle Realm) are exemplified by the more rigid Physical Realm and its “either-or” logic.
Each realm would be distinct and also continuously connected by what Wilber calls “the insides” of each quadrant. For instance, as Lexi Neale and I agree the insides of physical quadrants would correspond to non-local connections with the Subtle Realm.  



Different esoteric and mystical cosmologies may in essence and in principle (but perhaps not in interpretive, exoteric distinctions) be harmoniously integrated and illustrate aspects which have been individually or collectively experientially disclosed (by seers using specific methods in the past) of a multi-level, Kosmic understanding. Perhaps different aspects of the Subtle and Causal realms may have been personally disclosed by community-accepted, wisdom seers (according to level of consciousness, state of consciousness, perspective and method used in addition to the influence of accompanying worldviews). These non-physical realms and aspects may exist as actualities if considered within their own ontological level while -for the most- they may exist in a potential state in relation to our collectively experienced physical level…unless our level of interaction with them increases in which case they are co-created in combination with our physicality in our present awareness.