Я профессор философии, пытающийся критически относиться к текущим событиям

What my primary concern is, is the global unhappiness and peak instabilities which are not being addressed by many, many different groups instead of cohesion between all us Humanity. We’re always in the dark one way or another.

And, that is what’s making me frustrated as a thinker as well.

Where is the absolute datum point for all axioms of questions and thoughts to flow from? All of it. The prime pinnacle all the way up to the Big Bang if you will. That’s where I would like to start.

Time is our Emperor of all things as Humans. Start there as well. Then, the material plane. From the macro level all the way to this «Quantum Level».

If stuff happens in the Quantum Level, what is at the Macro Level?

The more I think and think, the more its like Light and Darkness entities. Bizarre.

https://youtu.be/B1J6Ou4q8vE

This is a concept I constantly think about. Which is why all this buzz stuff is happening. Maybe we’ve reached the door into their dimensions at the Quantum Level….and the more i think about it, it’s a giant figure of «8» in terms of a mathematical/ reality cycle if you know where I’m going with this.

I think the universe has a heart beat at the Quantum Level in regard to the cos and sin waves and that where the «waves» open like a valve, they come through…

Which, then begs the question… what is in the Macro level if we keep going up and up and up.

I’m not sure I agree with some of your points, but maybe we can find common ground through constructive discourse (if you are interested).
_____
You start off with the title «Believing in Aliens». I think that will introduce bias right off the start. Maybe that is your goal, as an exercise, but I think it’s narrowing down potential alternative explanations.

When it comes to aliens, I’m also not sure belief is necessarily involved. Yes, a lot of concepts that involve aliens rely on beliefs, but at the same time, the general notion that alien life exists is actually based on statistics, respectively probability, supported by credible scientific work (be that concepts, hypotheses, or even theories) serving as a foundation.

Maybe it is not necessary, but imho it seems wrong to not make the distinction between what is the «alien» concept supported by scientific consensus and the «alien» concept that is based on speculation and unverified claims.

You also don’t introduce a definition of «alien». You imply a definition based on the title you used, the notion of «alien» that involves a belief system, rather than scientific evidence.

It also does not take into considertaions other options, such as extradimensional, extratemporal, «extraversal», or otherwise — as well as the possibility that there might be a species co-existing with us on Earth we have failed to discover.

All of these alternatives have varying degrees of probability to be true, but they are possible, thus might have to be included — even if it’s just about articulating the concept of potential explanations requiring different kinds of evidence to come to solid conclusions.

«A framework for changing your mind» is a great subtitle. I think it would work well with «confronted with the currently inexplicable» as the main title or something along those lines. Because one way or another, we will find an answer, at which point it will no longer be a mystery.
_____

The levels themselves and their order are a matter of subjectivity.

As someone else pointed out, L1 should be L0. Simply because UFOs/UAPs are a fact. Unidentified objects/phenomena have been observed. Some have been identified, some have not. With the latter, it is unclear what their origin is.

The alien hypothesis however should not be considered among the most plausible. That point alone introduces more bias imho. Why would this be the most plausible explanation? Are other explanations really less plausible? Or equally plausible? For what specific reasons?

Why would you even provide any form of assessment regarding plausibility, if the entire point of this is to provide a *framework*? That seems like a questionable approach to me, but maybe you can elaborate why you think that is necessary.

Some of the points included should be part of an open discussion imho, instead of planting them as reasons for a specific line of thinking. It almost seems like it’s supposed to convince people, rather than help them navigate this topic by themselves by applying the framework.

_____

With L0 «aliens somewhere» you also make it clear that you focus on our universe and our dimension. That is what you establish as the definition of alien. Which is widely accepted. But if you want to discuss UFOs/UAPs in a larger context, that definition of «aliens» is not sufficient, respectively you would have do make the distinction as suggested above and introduce that at a later point — if one would argue that «classic» aliens are more likely than e.g. extradimensional or extratemporal beings.

Wormholes, in theory, may also allow for interuniversal travel, assuming the multiverse hypothesis is grounded in reality. Which would certainly introduce «extraversal» beings.

Maybe this is why NHI is a better term overall, as it would include all possible variations, including intelligent species co-existing on our planet, be that a humanoid species hiding underground or in the oceans — or simply other intelligent species we already know about. The latter may not be involved, but it’s nice to acknowledge their existence and include them nonetheless.

_____

L2 is a mixed bag imho.

Claims have been made that the government has UFOs/UAPs in their possession. But it is unclear if they are of alien origin (be that ET, ED, EV, etc) or if they are human-made.

Claims in regards to bodies or biological material are something else entirely. They may or may not be connected to UFOs/UAPs. The *assumption* is made that there is a connection. It is also assumed that bodies or biological material would be non-human. But that claim also has not been confirmed.

It is entirely possible that bodies are human, maybe genetically modified to some degree, exposed to radiation or chemical compounds, resulting in extreme deformations in combination with exposure to extreme forces, and so on. Pilot suits fusing with their skin, their heads deforming due to whatever exotic hazards or complications, etc.

As long as there is not evidence the scientific community can investigate and verify that these are entities that are not related to Homo sapiens in any capacity, we can’t really rule out anything.

The hyperfocus on one specific hypothesis seems unnecessary and limiting.

_____

L3 seems very overgeneralized and doesn’t take into account any other explanations that would be provided by the scientific community. It really focuses on the UFO lore and calls it legit.

I can see that this would be the perspective of someone on that «level», but if your goal is to teach critical thinking, this seems very biased, at least to me.
_____

L4 is very rudimentary. I’m not sure it’s even that different from L3 or even L2. Accepting the existence of NHI already kind of implies that one would assume there has been first contact to some degree.

One could make the distinction in regards of how much communication is taking place and what kind of diplomatic relations have been established, if any. Maybe it’s one more step after L2, so it would be L3/4 in one, because UFO/UAP lore goes on and on. It literally includes everything.

So the moment you largely accept the lore and agree with the claims, despite lack of evidence, you sure believe in some sort of communication.
_____

And with that, L5 also isn’t too far off.

I would even argue that you do not have to believe in any of this, but still entertain the possibility that some sort of galactic federation exists *somewhere*. Maybe not in our galaxy, maybe not in our universe. But given the likelyhood of NHI in general, why not?

It doesn’t even have to be an actual galactic federation in the sense that it spans across an entire galaxy? What even is a galactic federation? How many species, how many systems, how many sectors?

_____
_____

Maybe I’m just confused what you are trying to achieve here. It seemed like you wanted to provide a framework to help people come to an understanding of what kind of claims exist, what kind of evidence exists, how one could figure out what is within the realm of possibilities and what may be too speculative to be considered real.

But now, it really feels like this is more of a «guide how to believe in aliens».

And sure, this is great for believers who want to convince others. But it really isn’t great to teach skepticism and incentivize critical thinking?

Sorry if this isn’t the response you were looking for, but many others are hyped, so I guess that kind of appreciation outweighs my criticism.

Level 0 and Level 1 should be switched

[deleted]

doubt

Here’s an interview with Richard Doty (Special Agent of Air Force Office of Investigations) who will answer your curiosities…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3xK5O7Iqo0