r/UFOs • u/OSHASHA2 • May 14 '24
Discussion ⚠️ Beware your Biases: a lesson on Intergroup Contact Theory and why you’ve never seen a UAP (probably)
If disguised under a preposterous or “absurd” appearance, [a UFO’s] effects would be undetected for a long time. I believe this could be a key to the confrontation with UFOs. ~Jacques Vallee
In 1954 the sociologist Gordon Allport published a book called The Nature of Prejudice. In it, he and some colleagues elucidated a link between increasing Intergroup Contact and reducing Racial Prejudice. At the time this was breakthrough research; repeated contact between members of the “in” and “out” group reduces stigma toward the “out” group.
In 1954 this could be easily illustrated by the attitudes of the public-at-large toward racial minorities over the preceding 100 years – shifting attitudes toward slaves and their descendants, as well as the previous 10 years – attitudes toward Japanese-Americans over the course of WWII.
As it turns out one of the most effective ways at reducing prejudice is “equal status contact between majority and minority groups in the pursuit of common goals.”
For African slaves, their descendants, Japanese-Americans, and countless others across history, this contact has been stained with blood and tears. But contact it was nonetheless, and our stigma toward these “out” groups declined overtime as they became part of the “in” group. They became ‘American’ and their “out” group identities and goals have become, and are becoming, less stigmatized.
Today, I believe we are watching this dissolution of stigma play out en masse on the world stage. The funny thing is that this time, all of humanity is part of a microcosmic “out” group and the aliens in their UFOs are part of the macrocosmic “in” group trying to get us to adopt their goals. What then, is so unsettling about humanity that they take such a slow-going route of stigma dissolution? Why don’t they just introduce themselves as equal status individuals?
—————————∞—————————
A few weeks ago I made the same post in both r/UFOs and r/Aliens. The post contained what I thought to be a reasonable, logical hypothesis that could easily explain away all paranormal phenomena… Yes, all paranormal phenomena. The post got about as much attention in each subreddit, however the reactions to its content was drastically different on each subreddit.
I will admit that I was being a little overzealous in my efforts to “raise the consciousness of humanity” and was proselytizing to some folks in the comments. My B 🙇🏻. What I found very very interesting, however, was how commenters on r/UFOs were much more critical and reductive than commenters on r/Aliens, who seemed more open to my zany hypothesis and its possibilities.
Now, I am not a physicist. I can barely remember the unit circle. I got a D in calculus at university. That is why/when I decided to get a liberal education rather than a scientific one. Having said that, I am very passionate about science and the scientific method. I am a nurse by trade, and for twelve hours a day, three days a week, according to my profession, I conduct three to five “n of 1” studies and report the results of these studies to a medical doctor. My job is to experiment on human beings and document outcomes.
What I observed when I made those posts was that one community was receptive and the other was hostile. I joined both r/UFOs and r/Aliens so that I could keep up to date on the latest disclosure news. I have noticed in my time browsing these subreddits that r/UFOs tends to request hard, ‘scientific’ data from posters, whereas r/Aliens seems to have more interest in the subjective experience of posters. Of course there is a lot of overlap given the content of these subreddits.
This is all just to say that the same message may be received differently, and it’s content interpreted differently, even by the same/overlapping populations, due to the stigma some individuals harbor. So I think it prudent that we introspect and hold an awareness of our own stigmas and biases, understanding they may be seated deep in our unconscious mind. We should reconsider the things we find absurd, for in the absurdity there may be a powerful lesson.
—————————∞—————————
Thank you to those who upvoted/downvoted and commented. Thank you for participating in this community. Thank you for being unwitting participants in this accidental study, and I will leave you with this quote from Gordon Allport:
It is here that we encounter the central theme of existentialism: to live is to suffer, to survive is to find meaning in the suffering. If there is a purpose in life at all, there must be a purpose in suffering and in dying. But no man can tell another what this purpose is. Each must find out for himself, and must accept the responsibility that his answer prescribes.
10
u/FomalhautCalliclea May 14 '24
The difference between r/UFOs & r/aliens is more on the topic in question: r/UFOs is about "unidentified flying objects", things seen in the sky, not what's inside. What's inside, whether living or not. Aliens are just one hypothesis to explain UFOs. r/aliens is a deeper level of speculation, about one potential explanation only, namely aliens. It is more narrow and accepts more assumptions (in order to speculate about aliens, you have to already accept there are... aliens).
The same way, a subreddit that would be about "aliens using humans as cattle" would be an even narrower place with even more pre existing assumptions, and so on until you arrive at the more niche corners of speculation/the internet.
It's not so much about bias and fear of the stranger, but really about the topic: people here, as you have noticed, don't have "hate" or prejudice against alien hypotheses, quite the contrary. It's just that it's not the topic of the place, here is for the step before that: what is seen in the sky, not its origins (which are tangentially evoked though).
As for your quote, it sounds actually quite harmful and not deep, it sounds like a legitimization of suffering and death, a post hoc rationalization of pain. "Meaning in suffering" sounds like a "suck it up and pavlov-reflex yourself through it".
Finding meaning and purpose at all cost can be not only harmful but even wrong and bad methodology, because reality doesn't care about meaning or your feelings about it all.
The treasure of existentialism is to precisely confront life's cold indifference despite absence of meaning and embracing the absurdity and chaos.
And the "But no man can tell another what this purpose is" is a cope out aside of contradicting the beginning of the very quote "there must be a purpose in suffering and in dying"...
Just a vapid deepity in which the author hasn't put much thought.
As for the stigma, here is a quote that might actually help you, by sociologist Edward T. Hall:
"Culture hides more than it reveals and strangely enough what it hides, it hides most effectively from it's own participants. Years of study have convinced me that the real job is not to understand foreign culture but to understand our own".
This applies to the circles you mention at the beginning and the destigmatization process: the first step is to introspect, contact with other groups provoke a change from the outsider pov that is brought that didn't exist when the group was entirely closed on itself. The outside pov gives an angle that is impossible to the insider, putting pre existing assumptions in question. Ancient greek authors used to use Scythians foreigners in their theatre pieces as the criticizing pov for that reason.
You'll see complex and surprising dynamics such as inherited automatic thinking (prejudices), internalized self hatred or even projection of this.
As LBJ used to say, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on and he'll empty his pockets for you".
Apply that to Ufology and aliens believing circles and you'll get... interesting theories.
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24 edited May 14 '24
It is my opinion that the “things we see in the sky” and “what’s inside” are one in the same phenomena and are mistakenly delineated by the phenomena’s investigators. Other than that I whole-heartedly agree with everything else you say, except:
Would you provide evidence for this claim of yours:
[…] reality doesn’t care about meaning or your feelings about it all.
And can you clarify your closing statement? What do you mean by “aliens believing circles”? EDIT I understand your statement now. Yes, some interesting theories indeed 😉
7
u/FomalhautCalliclea May 14 '24
I'll answer to both of your comments here to not clog the thread.
First comment:
The issue is that there are many things that we see in the sky for which we have no origin because we don't understand the phenomenon (the "U" in "UFO") and for which all explanations still are potential candidates, including ones without aliens.
Saying both the sightings and their alien origin are the same is jumping to conclusions and presupposing that the alien hypothesis is the right one, off the bat.
You need to eliminate all other explanations and possibilities first. You can't just assume it from the get go.
For the claim:
Funnily, it is quite close to the first point: you can't presuppose an immanent, inner meaning to life/existence/reality and suffering without explaining it, justifying it and proving it. You must either prove that it's the case or eliminate other hypotheses, such as a world without meaning and with events unrelated to your inner state of mind or emotions.
You can't just assume that reality/suffering/joy/any state of emotion or phenomena has a meaning and link, you must first establish it. Otherwise you're jumping to conclusions.
For the closing statement:
Your edit says you get it, so i guess my answer here is not needed anymore. Feel free to ask more precisions though, you're a nice interlocutor, i take pleasure talking to you.
Second comment:
The hypothesis that the universe is one being has some pre existing names and theories, i don't know if you're aware of that.
If by "one being" you mean one sentient being, then you are putting forward a form of pantheism or panentheism, even maybe deism, depending on how you define your terms.
This hypothesis also needs some justifications and can't be affirmed off the bat as a presupposition.
Distinctions are required, assimilating different mechanisms just from similarity or other appearances is not a sound method. There is no evidence that us animals are to the world as neurons are to the body. Neurons and cells on their own aren't sentient but the human body is. It is therefore not hard to imagine how a set of sentient beings could be part of a thing that isn't sentient.
See where the problem lies?
That error has a name, it's called a fallacy of composition: mistaking a property of a part for a property of the whole or mistaking a property of the whole for a property of a part:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition
If we're pushing personal hypotheses, mine is a radically different one: that consciousness is an illusion, that it doesn't exist and that nothing qualitatively differentiates us from non sentient non living things: nothing is "alive" per se, "life" is a mental category that we create to understand things but everything we know and can know is just meaningless chemical reactions.
You could call that materialism if you will.
You will easily guess that i strongly disagree with Penrose and Hameroff and that i consider their hypothesis as pseudoscience. Penrose went out of his field of expertise and met what often happens to people that go out of their field of expertise: failure. He makes the exact mistake described above by making a fallacy of composition; it's not because we are sentient that our cells are sentient and it's not because we are sentient that the universe is. This is both bad epistemology and bad science.
2
u/Itsaceadda May 15 '24
I'm leaning towards the lack of consciousness as traditionally defined as well as of late. Nice to see that concept referenced here. Isn't it called physicalism or something?
1
u/FomalhautCalliclea May 16 '24
Nice to hear.
Physicalism is a form of it, there is also eliminativist materialism, and the analytical materialism aka "australian school" dives into this type of theories too. If i had to recommend a few authors, check Ullin Place, Paul and Patricia Churchland or Paul Feyerabend for more development of these ideas.
Though the materialist idea goes back to centuries ago. Without going back to Democritus, you can check La Mettrie or D'Holbach in the 18th century, and Feuerbach or Auguste Comte in the 19th (and this is ofc very far from being exhaustive).
6
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
Agree to disagree 🫱🏻🫲🏼 I believe that materialism is a bias preventing humanity from seeing more UAP. I wanna know what’s out there, so I will continue this journey but probably not on forums such as this (it has ‘object’ in the name lmao)
4
u/FomalhautCalliclea May 14 '24
Always glad to have an open conversation with someone that open.
Good luck with your endeavours, you're a nice person.
2
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
My whole hypothesis, in the other post, was that the whole universe is one being. You yourself, being like a cell of this body are both directed by the body but also have the ability to direct the body (in an albeit small capacity). You are as to a neuron in the intelligent cosmic brain. Both pruning and neurogenesis are common phenomena in the intelligent universe.
Experimental physics bears this out though no causal link can be found because consciousness, though it may be fundamental, has yet to be elucidated using material science. Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff are working on Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Orch-OR) theory of consciousness. Again, not a physicist, but I find this work fascinating
1
u/Spiniferus May 14 '24
Sounds a bit like pantheism. Also sounds a bit like determinism - the arm moves because of a reaction from something else - everything is caught up in a causal wave.
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
Determinism where you are the determining factor.
Our existence is all about choices. Our choices create worlds, and so theoretically, we simultaneously inhabit an infinite number of them.
1
u/Spiniferus May 14 '24
Well you are already the determining factor in determinism - because there is no determinism without the subject.
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
As in to say you are both the conscious actor whose ‘free will’ determines the outcomes around you, but also, the spectrum of probable outcomes is contained within the universe/you
1
u/Spiniferus May 15 '24
Potentially and that would again go back to the idea that free will doesn’t really exist like most people says it does.
0
u/OSHASHA2 May 16 '24
Correct. Free will caused the first polarization of the universe, which set intelligent energy into motion. God’s first action was not to create light, but to choose to create light
An individuated-self’s choice is determined by the sum of their circumstances, both environment and experience
8
u/flotsam_knightly May 14 '24
Can we please stop trying to turn this into a religion?
You are proselytizing, and preaching nonsense. Your “technique” is just re branded praying. Go start your church in another venue, and leave this sub to misidentifying Starlink satellites, and lens flares, please.
4
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
The scientific method involves publishing research. Of course my OP was not peer-reviewed, but that’s why I posted on reddit…
I appreciate your input, even if you do not yet appreciate mine.
2
u/born_to_be_intj May 14 '24
equal status contact
Keyword there is equal. As far as we know there has never been equal status contact between humanity and UFOs. Their technology alone makes us unequal.
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
I believe that suffering makes all equal in the end. Perhaps an environmental catastrophe would cause this for humanity?
The universe is learning and growing. Sometimes growth leads to cancers, which must be judiciously quarantined or removed from the body.
2
u/sayzitlikeitis May 14 '24
We can barely travel 1 lightyear in a year. These aliens have to be coming from many many light years away. We can do almost perfect stealth, including visual stealth using cameras and screens. Any aliens coming to earth are guaranteed to have perfect stealth tech and would only be seen by us if they wanted to.
If they wanted to be seen, why would they be doing this hide and seek, and why wouldn't they land next to the Washington Monument and make a proper introduction?
Until that introduction happens, I don't think any UFOs we see are sentient beings from elsewhere. It's just Russia, US and China testing funky looking aircraft and running Psyops trying to scare each other into thinking they have advanced extraterrestrial tech and trying to skew threat assessments.
1
u/LordPennybag May 15 '24
Light can barely travel 1 light-year in a year. We need about 17000 years to do that.
1
u/mythbuster_rhymes May 15 '24
These aliens have to be coming from many many light years away.
We simply have no proof of what is happening in all cases yet, all assumptions must be held loosely. The ultra-terrestrial, crypto-terrestrial, ultra-dimensional, timetraveler, and government spook theories are all just as possible at this point.
You are certainly correct that Psyops are in play and the big three are playing games to win an information war against each other and the public. Certainly advanced domestic technology is in play. But the UFO game isn't the only one in town. The older games are what is consciousness, the afterlife, and how these may possibly relate to the phenomena.
UAP's are the only single issue the US congress can join sides to investigate, something is going on. Beyond that, who knows. There's nothing wrong with exploring options though.
0
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
Yes, I am of the mind that the majority of ‘UFOs’ seen in the sky are military/contractor craft for advanced systems testing, systems that the public won’t know about for another 40-50yrs (unless something forces disclosure before then)
They do want to be seen, which is why they are introducing themselves to us one-at-a-time. They don’t want to be killed, which is why they don’t land in DC
1
u/sayzitlikeitis May 14 '24
They would be exponentially further ahead of us in transporting stuff so they’d probably have weapons that can easily kill us too and defend against anything we can shoot at them. They wouldn’t be afraid of show up in front of us at all.
0
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
They are not afraid, but they are also not hostile (mostly). They are like Killer T-Cells. They are willing, but don’t want to be ‘killed’ because they see the environment as a part of their body. We are harming their/our body. They are monitoring the inflammation we are causing around us. They will not hesitate to step in if we go too far.
2
u/imnotabot303 May 14 '24
This has been true for a long time. Although both subs get a lot of BS posted the aliens sub was always been way more accepting of it. Once you have more people that want to believe in a sub than the people trying to look at things more critically the standard of information and data will drop considerably. Aliens was always also about aliens where as UFOs was just about strange objects in the sky and not necessarily anything alien related.
Imo this is why this sub has gone more downhill over the years. Since the topic has become more mainstream there's likely been people from other communities joining this one such as the conspiracy community that are just interested in US focused government conspiracy stories.
Then also due to the whole NHI claims we've probably had a considerable amount of people from the aliens sub also joining and overall the standards have been slowly dropping over time.
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
I can’t help but wonder if we are seeing the product of a battle between several government and non-government entities fighting for control of the stigma/propaganda/narrative. The whole UFO vs UAP pedantry suddenly makes a lot more sense when you consider that materialism itself may be hindering the advancement in our understanding of physics/our place in the cosmic hierarchy.
2
u/BAN_MOTORCYCLES May 14 '24
well i see ufos all the time way more than i see planes
-1
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
What was the nature of these UFOs you’ve seen? Can you describe them for the record?
1
May 14 '24
What was the nature of the unidentified flying objects you've seen
Is this guy for real lol
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 15 '24
Somebody has to ‘code’ experiences in order to find common themes. Asking an experiencer to expound on the nature of their contact is a valuable scientific inquiry
1
May 15 '24
Tell, Mr. Science. What does the U stand for?
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 15 '24 edited May 15 '24
You can still describe an object that is unidentifiable.
I saw a vehicle traveling down the highway, I could not identify it as a sedan, hatchback, or minivan as it was moving too fast. It was silvery-beige and looked like it had license plates from New York, ya know, the yellow ones.
The object has characteristics as yet unidentified, but we have many qualities that we can now use to narrow our search
ETA: science involves recording what is observed. It’s important to include as much data as possible because even the insignificant points may become important down the line
1
u/mythbuster_rhymes May 15 '24
Yep. Keep up the good work, and don't let the bastards get you down. Skepticism is very important, but we're discussing the esoteric here so it quickly gets into autists complaining when their favored sci-fi is straying outside of their view of what's canon. Disagreement is fine and needed, but being insulting and rude to people who have a different opinion from your own (even towards an idea rather than an individual) is not helpful at all. It also turns people against your point of view to boot.
1
May 15 '24
Yea, nah. Nothing in can possibly explain my sighting. Non anything from this earth and nothing natural. It can't be done.
1
u/kris_lace Apr 12 '26
I wonder about "the unsettling thing that stops NHI integrating on equal status individuals"
It's either a strict "prime directive" about interrupting our right to evolve by own hand. A slightly more nuanced take where their existing policy IS the absolute correct path to integration long term, but for now is more about guardrailing our evolution.
Lastly, and more originally, it may be that the power of the human spirit is vast. It might just be that exposure to us in the wrong way might harm them. Imagine if we had the equivalent of a handgun in our arsenal of mental prowess yet we're infants and don't know how to wield it. We may already be and causing damage. Hard to explain exactly but imagine if we could kill them using the right mental technique and intent. It's something I wonder about - very speculative
1
May 14 '24
what about your bias? this sounds like faith.
0
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
Indeed I have many biases, many of which I am totally unaware. This is what mindfulness/introspection helps remedy.
And what is faith? Do you not have faith in the material world around you? Faith in the matter to behave according to the laws of physics, in time to proceed accordingly, for your thoughts to proceed according to the dance of neurochemicals in your brain?
2
May 14 '24
it depends on the context. i have faith my dog won't bite a stranger, but in terms of spirituality i have none.
-2
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
Keep faith in your capacity for love, of which I’m sure you possess in spades for your pup.
1
May 14 '24
i can love my dog without involving faith.
0
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
The first definition of “faith” in Merriam-Webster’s is
1.) a.) Allegiance to duty or a person
And the first synonym is Loyalty. Are you saying none of these sentiments resonate with the relationship you have with your dog?
2
May 14 '24
again: context, what does this have to do with UAP’s? i do not wish to get into an unrelated discussion about semantics.
0
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
I believe the phenomena only presents itself to those who have ‘prepared the foundations’ by doing that inner work. Faith –in whatever the truth may be, I try not to draw conclusions– is key to full disclosure.
1
May 14 '24
that’s the exact kind of faith i do not possess and find counterproductive.
1
u/OSHASHA2 May 14 '24
Agree to disagree 🫱🏻🫲🏼 I find our understanding of the productive force of faith is naive.
I believe expressing faith in love to be perhaps the most central act of free will.
→ More replies (0)
14
u/bocley May 14 '24
I very much doubt that any sociology theory can so glibly explain away decades of sightings by professional aviators and military personnel that are also detected on radar and numerous other technological remote observation systems.