Peter Skafish, Ph.D. on Anthropomorphism & Ontology 

SOL foundation is EXACTLY what this phenomena needs. It's long passed the time for open discussion and study.

Please consider setting the videos up in a Playlist so that the listener could listen to the totality of the speeches in one flow

This is the first I'm hearing from Dr. Skafish, but hot damn, what a talk! He raises some really, really good points here, all of which pretty much boil down to "We're making way too God damn many assumptions here when we don't know jack about who or what we're dealing with." Excellent paper! (Edit to fix a hilarious autocorrect)

It's amazing to me that there isn't millions of views on the SOL foundation Videos yet. Thank you for researching UAP and giving legitimacy and understanding to such a complicated topic.

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 01:15 🌌 *The publication of the Schumer disclosure amendment prompts serious discussion about UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) and non-human intelligence, challenging conventional understanding and raising ontological questions.* 02:36 🤔 *Questions about UAP and non-human intelligence (NHI) challenge existing paradigms, revealing a need to reconsider fundamental concepts and categories of thought.* 04:14 🔄 *Anthropomorphism, especially in modern thought, hinders understanding of non-human intelligence by projecting human concepts onto other beings.* 08:10 💡 *The concept of technology limits understanding of UAP and NHI, potentially overlooking non-technological aspects and broader dimensions.* 11:51 🧠 *Preconceived notions, including technological and supernatural perspectives, constrain understanding of UAP and NHI, leading to anthropomorphism.* 17:26 🌍 *Exploring alternative ontologies, such as animism, offers new perspectives on UAP and NHI, challenging modern paradigms and broadening understanding.* 23:52 🌌 *Shifting perspective to an animist ontology challenges the notion of reality as inert matter, allowing for a broader understanding of consciousness and intelligence.* 24:48 🤔 *Considering UAP and NHI through an animist lens offers a starting point for imagining non-human intelligence, emphasizing diverse forms of consciousness and embodiment.* 27:26 💡 *Exploring UAP events in an animist ontology reveals the potential for asymmetrical encounters and diplomatic relations with non-human beings, challenging traditional religious perspectives.* 29:27 🧠 *Embracing a universe rich with self-consciousness allows for a generic conception of NHI and a range of potential embodiments, avoiding premature judgments about their nature and origins.* Made with HARPA AI

"If we have asymmetry, we have politics." True dat!

This was one of those iconic speeches that really forces you to try and think objectively and critically. Very well written and presented.

So, basically: - Peter's speech title: Conceptualizing Non-Human Intelligence: Anthropomorphism and Ontology - The publication of the Schumer Disclosure Amendment draft has brought UAP Vehicles into public discourse. - It raises questions about the nature and origin of UAP and non-human intelligence (NHI). - Lack of professional researchers and ambiguous data hinder understanding. - Anthropomorphism leads us to project human concepts onto NHI, hindering understanding. - Modern concepts like technology, biology, and politics limit our understanding of NHI. - Anthropologists suggest considering other ontologies, like animism, to better understand NHI. - Animism views all beings as self-aware and capable, leading to a broader understanding of NHI. - Thought experiment: Imagining NHI through an animist lens allows for a wider range of possibilities. - Animism helps in conceiving NHI not just as physical entities but also as beings of thought and consciousness. - Conclusion: Recognizing different anthropomorphisms allows for a more nuanced understanding of NHI.

These videos have far too few views.

I will have to listen to that one every few months, let it simmer!

A lot of the conclusions he seems to present feels baseless and unadressed. He explains that we are improperly viewing NHI/ UAP through an anthropomorphic lens without explicitly stating what that lens is, aside from the assumption that UAP are at least partial technological. The idea that UAP are partially technological in some capacity is apparent from the capacity in which we have retrieved them and have had radar signals of them. While this isnt always the case we do know for a favt that in some cases they are partially technological. He also present the unfounded idea that we are somehow incapable of/ haven't even considered the idea that they are potentially in part not technological, when this has already widely been discussed and conceptualized in the space. Nothing he said really priposed any profound ideas that anyone who has put more than several hours of thought into NHI amd UAP hasn't considered themsevles. This talk was disappointing and the target audience was clearly for hyper educated academics who were completely uneducated in the area of UAP/ NHI (which most people in attendance and who are likely to see this are not). However it is useful for posterity assuming: 1.) people encounter this video and have the academic background to understand the message clearly 2.) can take this subject seriously before even educating themselves on the subject, at which point they likely would have had this conwiderations themself. Aside from that and my opinion that his word choice was unnecessarily verbose, I think we can all appreciate the ideas presented

I appreciate the opportunity for self examination with this topic. It had not occurred to me that I had anthropomorphized NHI to fit within a prescribed box of my own thinking. It is because of this point that I feel people have a right to the information the government holds on this topic, if they have anything intelligent to add to the conversation. This is also where I get stuck when attempting to consider where the general populace should go to for these answers or in pursuit of them since the government is not cooperating fully. I think Dr. Skafish provides here some good guidelines for everyone's eventual grappling's with the ramifications of an other( in terms of NHI).

It is hard for the government to comprehend that anything could exist greater than it. All things of power or perceived greatness, even humankind, will encounter moments, life, or information that will bring it to its knees. Stay humble.

Translation for mere mortals -- "We have no fuckin' idea what's going on."

Quite brilliant ! One summer in my garden in Tilford uk, I saw a fly caught in a shaft of sunlight through the pine trees. I approached it carefully until I faced it head on. It hovered completely motionless in a golden aura of beating wings, jerking and swivelling this way and that by micro degrees, its crystal boggle eyes glinting as it scrutinised my Mount Rushmoor face. In this moment, suspended in this shaft of sunlight, we examined each other, and I sensed a kind of inquisitive awareness reaching across to me. Then it was gone. I have no idea what that fly made of me. It was a very strange encounter.

Today is a good day

Very useful perspective. However, these ideas were written down as an article, and not as a plan for a talk. Hence it is perceived not as fluidly as it could be

Thank you , amazing talk

This seems to be one of the most important talks of the Sol conference I have listened to yet.

Listening to this talk, I think about the strange dances and lights shows that UAP will put on sometimes, in broad daylight, over crowded cities. They hop around, left to right, right to left, turn bright red, to orange. Then they'll drip out other versions of themselves vertically then merge back into a single object and take off...[the footage is out there go find it] We have no idea what if anything these behaviors mean. They might have very specific meanings, they might have none. The inter-dimensionals are the greater mind fuck, I mean at least with extraterrestrial beings from say another star system in the local neighborhood we can assume they exist and abide within the same laws of physics as we do, and quite possibly were driven by the same mechanisms of evolution and ecology with similar functional needs commensurate with being physical beings in this dimension(i.e. energy needs, consumption, growth, death). By contrast, with beings from another dimension we can't assume a similar evolutionary mechanism or even the same laws of physics. The notion of "hello" might not mean anything to them, they might just know, like know everything, know all time. The notion of "interaction" as we understand it might fall apart completely and be impossible in any meaningful way for us. This is how weird some of this phenomenon could be.

A version or Aversion of humanity?

You can tell is good advice because it’s uncomfortable. Investigating the unknown for me means surrendering human preconceptions and calmly openly looking at all the data then starting again from a first principals or “empty cup” approach. Near death experiences, remote viewing, astral projection and channeling and are just as uncomfortable topics as quantum entanglement used to be (possibly still is for some). However I see threads of connections between all of the above which for me at least exposes a much larger view of reality than most of us currently have. I get that most humans are probably evolutionarily predisposed to not taking too large a view, ie the ones who are paying attention to where they put their feet get to pass on their genes, and I accept this without prejudice. However if you do believe you can take the larger view, I encourage you to listen to this talk and examine what you don’t want to think about possibly because it’s too far out. To me that’s a starting point. Examine why you may have an opinion of a given topic without possibly doing any research into the field. Take the time if you can to do a bit of serious investigation into the far fetched. Sorry for my diatribe. Long time watcher first time posting. I know I’m mostly talking to like minded individuals so I thought it was worth the effort. Thank you to all the speakers and I can only imagine what it takes to remain in a field of study so unfunded and shunned for so long. Thank you

Currently back in college for Sociology, so this was a treat on multiple levels! Thank you so much for this perspective and especially sharing it with the public! We absolutely need to seek other perspectives. I was just thinking this morning: it seems like the study of consciousness is getting close to consideration of what one might call "the soul". Then what? Will the enormous repository of past human studies of spirit be consulted, integrated or ignored? I feel the same about the phenomena (they cannot really be separated). There are countless human cultures and histories that already address this, and we need to consider that knowledge. It can be difficult to comprehend what might sound like myth and fantasy to us, but if we can't handle that very HUMAN difference of perspective...how far beyond can we expect our understanding to reach?

Wish there was a Google translate for this to my high school education. What i understood was fascinating. Doing my part for the algorithm.

Thank you for your efforts! The public deserves the truth, even if the truth is scary. We should not live a lie

Glad to see the foundation start. I hope you consider writing the speeches with the masses in mind.

Thankyou

This is the best talk yet!!

I continuously see people saying it will kill religion if true. To me that is incredibly closed minded. You already have in your head that it couldn't possibly be something from our Creator. The majority of Religions already believe that there are other dimensions in which beings reside. To be open minded is important because we don't know. But, I'd encourage people to stop automatically assuming Religion will fall apart. Remember that David Grusch has stated that he has actually come back around to his religion. And no matter how much you think you know chances are you don't. None of us do.

Finally! Most profound, important and fundamental speech on this topic to date! Looking forward to the great changes that are ahead of us. Positivity for humanity❤ Spreading out the concept of love to all humans as we walk into the new age of understanding.

Looking forward to this ✌🏼

Perhaps they ARE denizens of the imagination. Perhaps, then, it is so that “imagination” requires reconsideration and redefinition. Currently we speak of HAVING an imagination. But what if imagination has US? What if imagination is more fundamental than we know? What if it is not emergent? What if imagination is the active power of consciousness of a universe that is essentially consciousness at base? Such an imagination has the power to unfold anything that it “wishes”. Such an imagination is boundless. Such an imagination can form realities that are so far beyond what humans are capable of comprehending that to be confronted by them would be akin to a ferret being confronted by a large hadron collider. I can say that what I felt when confronted by a strange craft and a being in 1993, and a lifetime of high strangeness that followed, has not been dissimilar to such a confrontation. It may turn out to be that magic and alchemy not only preceded and informed what we call modern science but will one day follow what we will one day call antiquated science.

So many words for so little meaning. I learnt nothing that was not already absolutely self evident.

I think this topic is awesome to discuss however I am unsure who the audience for this is intended. I would think this could be presented in a format more easily understood. In trying to convey this, you might want to consider the KISS principle. Great concepts and thoughts!

A great lesson on being humble. Maybe the most important talk so far.

A related topic is that of individualism. There's a tendency to ask about NHI in terms of what do "they" want? We don't know if there is a uniformity of agendas, whether individually or in terms of groups/political factions. Dr. Skafish presents an important (if frustratingly intractable for now) way to conceive of NHI & UAP broadly. My favorite presentation at SOL.

As one of those indiginous people mentioned, I find it amusing when life is discussed. Yet, even as the plants scream, most disavow them their share of being alive in this world. Whatever resides elsewhere/elsewhen is also alive in itself. Peer long enough into the quantum, and all things are likely.

Dr Skafish dropping ontological bombs 🤯

This talk was a warning to those academics (most of them) who have become complacent and too comfortable with their compartmentalized and limited explanatory frameworks. Fitting aspects of it into existing explanatory categories means recognizing a resemblance to other knowledge already in that category. Thus, only the aspects that resemble something already known will be allowed for investigation. I'm coming to the view that one of the purposes of the Phenomenon is to challenge human beliefs and knowledge frameworks. The exercise of trying and failing to fit this Phenomenon into one's own framework can be very useful in exposing the limits of that framework.

Anthropology is a study of peoples without a government check. Sociology is a study that encourages classifying people and then gives them a government check. They're not really a science nor is Criminology. Big exotic words justify their grants and other funding. He is really saying you don't have the "education" to understand why you are wrong. Don't listen to his dribble.

A presentation not aimed at the public. Brilliant, but how do you expect to get the wider public on board by making your thoughts on this complete!y inaccessible. A big mistake

Content: Great Format: Terrible Nobody should read a paper at a conference. If people are going to do that then just send me the paper I can read it myself. I always consider it an insult to the audience when speakers don't bother to prepare a proper talk. They do themselves and their ideas a disservice.

There are two types of death, the one you know and the one you don't. 1) the death you know is of others and is in the past. 2) the death you don't know is of you and is in the future. Technology is in the future and so is your death. It might be a coincidence but it might actually be a clue.

Generally real nice talks. Enjoyed the more technical approach more though. As usual I fall asleep the instance some of the humanists start to talk. I would need so much more education to grasp the seemingly not interconnected nonsensical conseptions that make logical chains in the minds of the humanists. Still I am glad that this UAP/NHI topic is of interest to all the fields of science and everybody is welcome to contribute. The SOL Foundation is the most outstanding effort in beginning to understand this phenomenon openly and worldwide, outside the military and DOD. Thank you organizers, thank you Stanford.

The word "we" is doing some heavy lifting in this particular talk. It may have been more accurate to not apply hyperbolic or totalizing language to what is actually already a varied set of understandings. It is, however, useful in the explanation of the wider "average" of conceptions that permeate neoliberal capitalist societies. Philosophical post humanism and/or posthumanism or transhumanism have had a lot to say about the topica at hand within this talk. The political aspects of this talk have a lot of intersection with certain aspects of anarchism in my and other's existing conceptions as well. This being said... No gods, no masters 🌹🏳️‍⚧️

Peter, great insights at 14 minutes in. I’d offer to create and measure against a framework much akin to what was laid out in The Law of One and the work llresearch did up to this point. I believe you’ll find this framework of densities and polarity (and physical and non physical vehicles observed) to offer a similar approach to nation-states within our present earthly geopolitical evolution.

Is there a way to find the paper/transcript somewhere? This is really good but his voice made me fall asleep

brilliant guy but his deadpan delivery and monotone voice is making it impossible to absorb anything

Thank you!

All but saying, there are a ton of different species and essentially they're going to look messed up

Could he please use a more monotonous voice, he still alternates between 2 tones. 😢

We need to work with premises that can at least lead us somewhere. We CAN understand all of this.

Egregores?

I have never seen a black experiencer, why is this

I need a few days to digest this

Overly academic and monotone.

This is the best speech given.

Sounds kind of like what Dr. John E. Mack might be saying at this point if he was still alive. But a bit too "scholarly" for my tastes. Short version is that consciousness and intelligence can come in many forms, from technologically superior beings from other worlds in space, to various animals, to entities perhaps nonphysical in nature, to various combinations -- and maybe even large language models that reside on a server. Of course, perhaps I've largely misinterpreted the points he was trying to make. Budd Hopkins would, of course, be focusing on the fact that people are having real experiences with these other intelligences, and some people are suffering as a result. I certainly hope the spirit of Mack and Hopkins will always be with us as society inevitably opens up to the existence of nonhuman intelligence. I've followed UFOs (UAPs) since the eighties. The mainstreaming of the subject among serious-minded people sure has been slow going, but it looks like we are finally making progress now.

I know this is not the basis of Skafish's paper, but I have had it with academics uncritically resorting to the appeal to authority wherein governmental statements/activity, or the pronouncements of legacy media, are the default metric for discursive legitimacy. Skafish dives headfirst into this fallacy, despite his apparently "deconstructionist" orientation regarding anthropomorphic ideology. I find this extremely strange, given that the general left-leaning political approach within academia has been to regard institutions like the US government, and its colonial lineage, as systemically corrupt and an antagonist against its own population. Why that critical lens would suddenly be inverted for a subject which academia has been content to ridicule for decades I find highly suspect, and I have to wonder what exactly has compelled Skafish to write a paper on the subject now. That said, I appreciate that Skafish, in some minor way, pushes against the popular and technophilic interpretation of UFOs and close encounters as constituting something immeasurably more "advanced" than humans. That interpretation only works if we have a reliable and stable set of referents to make comparisons. As it stands, it is just as easy to argue that the beings here constitute a *devolution* compared to humans, depending on which attributes were are going to merit and which to demerit.

Everything he just said is still anamorphic.Even if you chose to use cultures such as Amazonia.....who are still human.

I do make many assumptions about the NHI. I assume that they are always working. Exploring and observing is their goal or obligation. Secrecy of their conduct is important. They do not value entertainment or humor. They have absolute control over emotions like anger. They are capable of doing anything they desire. They breathe our air. They are comfortable at our temperature. They are bipedal. The have two arms. They have two eyes.

I feel I may be Ill-equipped to fully digest what he is saying, I wish he could boil it down for a mere mortal. I have read some of the comments, and I get that we have preconceptions and biases of the nature of reality, including ourselves, but I am lost beyond that. Wasn't it said about Einstein and other physicists (Feynman comes to mind), that part of their brilliance was being able to describe extraordinarily complex ideas to laypeople. Once in a while I wish the SOL folks would stop beating around the bush and just spit it out in as simple terms as they can. This can't be as simple as can be.

Thank you!

I wonder if these lifeforms have pets like we have dogs and if they have evolved from a "stone age" like we did? Do they have jobs and sports like we do and do they have music or art? I think my questions are anthropomorphic right?

This talk can be simplified to: we should not anthropomorphize UAP, or use our culture to describe them.

Much as the topic and title are hugely of interest to me, I really struggle to sit through a lecture where someone is literally reading a paper to me. Compare this presentation to that of Kevin Knuth or Jacques Valle', where they are presenting and engaging, rather than reading. Other than that, I love this Sol Foundation concept - please do more of these meetings!

The judging of other people in the way most due is because of ignorance for one and the other, bottom line, reason is because most people do not have a grasp on who they are at the core. Therefore are not able , in that state , to perceive the greater understanding , ( not that they are unable ) . One has to either be an exceptional deep thinker and/or have a direct experience with the non-human and their craft. We are only scratching at the surface of reality and it's boundary is expanding at a very fast rate on many many levels . We as a race are heading towards something I believe we do not fully understand. It really is time to move forward at a faster rate and then weigh the balances very carefully . :O)

I think this is easily the most important of all of these presentations. I've found the modernist, physicalist ontological approach to this subject to be so incredibly reductive and ignorant of other possible ontologies incredibly frustrating as an animist and anthropologist who is interested in the beingness of UAP. This is much needed medicine for the community!!!

This man is brilliant at explaining our explanations of the unexplainable. He has not explained why he is wearing that damned tuxedo shirt at this symposium.

OOOOh, Peter Skafish - you have a groupie in me! Very thought provoking talk.....

Lightbulb moment What a brilliant speaker Peter Skafish is. Bravo to you all at the SOL Foundation, this is truly what this subject needed, professions and great minds growing together on one platform, all we need now is a grownup place to register our sightings.

I do think there is going to be the fact that creatures evolve to solve constraints, some universal and some particular to their situation, and that being the case, have certain patterns of behavior that can be understood (and indeed a behavioral pattern at all). Creatures evolve physically, neurologically, and behaviorally to succeed at the challenges they face in their existance. Ones that have come to a path of intelligence and tool making and eventually to technology to control and overcome their environments (in all that that means) and moved past irrationality and heuristics that once proved useful somehow (such as religions and other false attributions regarding their environments and fellow lifeforms which they to deal with, and persistent emotional states (ie., would a nearly omnipotent being hold grudges?, would they hold other intelligent beings to be 'precious'?)) will not be beyond at least some understanding in terms of motives, intentional actions, and reactions. I believe so, and hope so, FWIW.

Love this. The world is ready.

A lot of big words as you would expect from a Ph D. It's actually a good review of many current and past interpretations of UAP. In truth this can be shortened to about 10 minutes if you remove the crap. Many of his conclusions are wrong or over simplified IMO. He keeps mentioning politics which as far as I can see, has no effect of UAP or NHI knowledge.

Very interesting. Is there a ‘for dummies’ version I can share with my friends and family? 😅

Please - don't read to us, TALK to us. This may be uncomfortable for you, but if it is that tells me your ability to communicate outside of academia is limited. The delivery of information on the fascinating topic here is stifling.

So interesting but so not engaging.. an audio book is a bad way to convey such thoughts.

@5:12 funny how the meaning of the word "doom" have been replaced by the name of the game, even in the captions

A thoroughly fascinating perspective to help expand the way in which we approach the very notion of NHIs, and ultimately inform how we might explore their nature, and the nature of our interactions with them. What an amazing time to be alive XD

Very good but how do all the sightings of humanoids fit with this open minded view I wonder?

Divinity, does come from the same origins as “divide”.

This is the NHI discussion I’ve been waiting for and I’m here for it! 👏👏🙌🙌

Quantum consciousness is core to spiritual science and to understanding of all UAP and paranormal phenomena. While limited perspective approaches may be as useful as Newtonian Mechanics can be in some scales and problem spaces as compared to Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity, you're not going to get very far in understanding current events without delving into making sense of the historical and mythical/paranormal human experience in the context of quantum consciousness and a co-created spiritual multiverse of massive multiplayer incarnation avatar virtual realities using composite hierarchical soul vehicles, both physical, nonphysical, and metaphysical. Creation has been about developing a system of manufacturing, training, and entertaining an endless supply of newborn NPC and more experienced free-willed souls of all strengths and weaknesses, and isolating the least well-socialized souls into padded cell universes where they can play with their mental toy soldier NPC creations without harming any more conscious soul.

We all agree Ryan Reynolds did the voiceover right?

Mesmerized by these ideas! We need more of this, for sure.

This was written and delivered in a manner that one would present to their peers and students. This message was made for and aimed directly at academia itself it seems.

Is it really so hard to deliver this text in normal lecture instead of monotonous reading? Damn, it's painful to listen to this, it's like hearing some poor AI rendition.

Hell yeah! Love this guy!

One world world peace

Me not likey nhi

humbleness was lacking here, and the opening sentences were condescending. Everything said could have been said in a simpler language. the content , although deep and challenging, was presented in a monotonous tiring somewhat haughty manner. too many words in too many complicated embelished sentences. wouldnt listen to that man again.

I loke his jokes. 😁👍

Phenomenal

Thank you

Everyone say hello 👋. We’re being studied for our reactions. It’s all part of the disclosure plan. First, release it to those who already believe. No doubt the lovely Sean Kirkpatrick will be watching this. Sean, nobody believes you or ever has.

That was quite the word salad.

We are the only ones who can Change ourselves. We need a paradim shift toward caring for one another not because it is profitable, but because it is the essense of being Human. Psychopathy and sociopathy have become "Virtues" in this twisted Hell we have made for ourselves. It is time to end War. It is time to become our best selves. Why would any advanced civilization approach Us, as Evil as we are to one another? From the essasys of Micheal De Montainge, The King of France hosted three tribal chiefs from the Amazon and sent them on a tour of his kingdom. When they were asked what they thought of his Kingdom, they had three answers. The first was why are you ruled by a Child. Why does not one of these strong men beside you rule in your stead? The second was, if we left our old and sick folk to die starving in the streets the way you do, they would take us by the throats in the night. The third answer was lost in time. I think their third answer was, why do only some of you dance? Because the people of the tribal leaders spent 70% of their time dancing. They had no words for Greed, Theft, Lies... They were cannibals but I find them morally superior to Us.

lol you gotta love SOL mission statement that corporate clients come first before the public. "To provide reliable, cutting-edge advisory research to the United States’ and other national governments as well as corporate clients" only after these considerations humanity gets a mention...

An ant has a better chance of figuring out the nature of a human than we do of figuring out the nature of aliens.

Lue summed up this entire speech with one sentence. How do you even know what questions to ask?