THE SUPERPOWERS OF THE HUMAN BIOMIND
vis a vis
THE PROBABILITIES OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL SUPERPOWERS

ORIENTATION and INTRODUCTORY
Ingo Swann (08Feb01)
A dispassionate survey of definitions of the human mind reveals that although a small variety of its aspects are identified, the sum of all of the definitions leaves many more refined aspects in the shadows. This includes modern scientific definitions, and even occult and esoteric definitions as well.
None of the definitions of the mind are wrong per se, but the definitional process of identifying the larger nature of the mind is incomplete, and probably vastly so.
One reason for this is that such definitions are NOT derived from or based upon visible functions and attributes of the mind itself. Instead, and as will be elaborated in Part 1 to follow, the definitions that do come into existence are set up by this or that societal order, and so the definitions usually reflects the limits of knowledge within each of those orders.
This clearly implies that definitions of mind on Earth are little more than socio-determined ones. They are based on societal concepts and not on impartial and full observations of mind itself, which transcends all such concepts.
The human mind, both in essence and in manifest functions, DOES transcend all socio-determined situations - BECAUSE all such situations are products of the overall human mind itself.
In the larger perspective of this, it can therefore be understood that ANY definitions of mind that are socially derived merely reflect some kind of socio-control agenda regarding how the mind should or should not be thought of, as contrasted to what mind actually is in all its magnificence and potential powers.
If we can think that any definitions of mind that we learn about via education have been established merely within self-limiting contexts of various kinds of socio-control agendas, then we would expect to discover that mind has NOT been examined and defined at the all-inclusive human species level.
In fact, there would be no apparent reason to undertake such an examination – in the absence of factors that might make it NECESSARY to do so.
This is much the same as saying that Earth societies would separately continue to identify and define mind only via the thinking-lenses of those societies, for there is no obvious reason to do otherwise.
However, it could occur that Earth societies might encounter ANOTHER species having powers of mind at least commensurate with, but perhaps advanced beyond our own species.
Of course, this kind of encounter is, and has been, a pure speculation – with the exception (discussed in Part 1) of recent and remarkable developments in advancing astrophysics that are in process of converting the speculation into something akin to a semi-concrete hypothesis of actual possibility.
In any event, if mind, mind powers, and intelligence within the context of another species, perhaps more powerful than our own, needed to be understood, the process of doing so would ALSO mean that deeper knowledge of the mind quanta of our own species would have to be illuminated more clearly and intimately.
“Another species,” of course, can easily refer to one that is extraterrestrial, largely because we do not experience here on Earth another species equipped with mind-power-intelligence that is commensurate with our own.
The historical human experience on Earth has merely been to encounter other social orders, the various patterns of which all download from the mind-mental-intelligence attributes of our species as a whole.
Since many aspects of our species mind have been denied authenticity within the limiting contexts of this or that societal order, it cannot really be said that fuller knowledge packages of mind itself have been achieved beyond the limited sum of those contexts.
If, however, our species were to encounter another species, especially an extraterrestrial one “more developed” than ours, then it would have to be concluded, at some point, that our own mind-mental-intelligence attributes are, well, “less developed” BY COMPARISON.
It is this COMPARISON, and evidence for it, that can be explored by hypothesis and speculation – from which no conclusions need be drawn.
Part One:
OUR HUMAN POWERS OF MIND
vs
THE POSSIBILITY OF ET INTELLIGENCES
Ingo Swann (21Feb01)
There are a number of pathways by which we can approach the subject of how Earthside knowledge of MIND would stack up against similar kinds of knowledge developed by life forms elsewhere in the cosmos.
Of course there is yet no absolute certainty that extraterrestrial entities equipped with minds do exist. Thus, in order to proceed, one has to imagine, speculate, or hypothesize that they do.
The principle justification for making such an effort is that IF mind-developed species do exist elsewhere in the universe, then perhaps our own human species emanating or traveling from Earth could encounter them, or perhaps those species emanating or traveling from some cosmic elsewhere might encounter ours.
It is by considering the ways and means of such “traveling” that a very significant situational problem can stand revealed: The species that first achieves the traveling capabilities would be considered “advanced” by those species that had not yet achieved anything along such lines.
Something now depends on what the “advanced” connotation is thought to refer to. It is clear that Earth people seem justified in thinking in terms of advanced technology that bestows the capabilities of negotiating deep cosmic reaches of space. But this thinking principally refers to the 3-dimensional contexts of physical space and whatever matter and energy is involved in it.
On Earth, the idea that ET technology would be advanced is arrived at by comparison with Earth-based technology that is neither commensurate to nor on a match with ET space-travel capabilities.
We do not know, for certain, what such ET technology might consist of. But it can be hypothesized that perhaps some ET civilization achieved the necessary space-travel capabilities in the terms of 3-dimensional physicality.
It is clear that Earth people have not yet matched the ET capability. And so the ET capability must be seen as technologically advanced in comparison to Earth’s space technology – and especially so IF any evidence for ET space-travel and arrivals in near-Earth proximity can be discovered.
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY IMPLIES THE EXISTENCE OF ADVANCED MINDS
The foregoing seems to hold water, but it does so only to a certain degree, and then only with regard to a physico-energetic technology brought into existence within 3-dimensional matter, energy, and space.
Within their specific materialistic contexts, ideas concerning a physical-energetic space technology are sufficiently rational, and so confidence is placed in such materialistic ideas by the conventional sciences and by UFOlogists alike.
But one of the implications of this is that Earth people will tend to interpret ET via Earth-based ideas of a physico-energetic technology - in other words, via 3-dimensional equipment.
However, just behind this physical, 3-dimensional interpretation is a rather unavoidable reality: no technology can come into existence in the absence of minds to innovate it. Even physical 3-dimensional technology does not magically produce itself.
If, therefore, one hypothesizes (a) the existence of ET advanced technology, one is also supposing (b) the real existence of ET advanced minds that innovated and produced their technology.
As indicated above, the idea that something is “advanced” is arrived at by comparing two relatively similar things and finding that one of them performs and produces far better, and perhaps amazingly so, than the other one.
Implicit in this comparing, however, are what might be referred to as information and knowledge packages. Things do not of and in themselves become advanced or inferior with respect to each other unless some kind of function or activity is established within their perspectives.
For example, the possibility of planetary and stellar space travel could be hypothesized by any number of ET civilizations, and, indeed, this notion has even emerged on Earth. In this sense, the basic hypothesis of space travel would probably be relatively similar everywhere in the universe.
However, AFTER the hypothesis is established, THEN comes the universal reality of what information and knowledge packages are required to convert the hypothesizing into a functional activity whereby space travel is actually achieved.
And, one may as well add, achieved not merely in the light of experimental attempts to do so, but with sustainable and predictable certainty.
MIND DEALS WITH INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE PACKAGES
Via the foregoing considerations, it can appear that the real make-break point between any recognizable advanced or inferior status of something has to do with the existence of minds that can deal with information and knowledge packages.
Such are, of course, the workhorses of mind, so much so that if mind does not fundamentally deal with information and knowledge packages, then it is rather difficult (1) to identify what it does deal with, and (2) to comprehend why it is even needed.
In this sense, it can be hypothesized that mind anywhere in the cosmos fundamentally deals with information and knowledge packages.
It can therefore be suspected that minds that deal with greater, even vast volumetric amounts of information and knowledge (1) could probably be thought of as “advanced” over those minds dealing only in lesser amounts, and (2) could probably have developed and engineered “advanced” technologies.
EARTH-HUMAN IDEAS OF WHAT MIND IS
The term MIND has been utilized rather liberally here.
Doing so has permitted hypothesis regarding the fundamental possibility of ET mind(s) elsewhere in the cosmos.
Doing so has also permitted speculation that mind dealing, to one degree or another, in information and knowledge packages might be a universal constant wherever mind is found. However, ET comprehensions of what mind is could be quite different from our own ideas of it.
There are nine basic ways that MIND is officially defined and considered here on Earth. Although a very large literature exists regarding the topic of mind, discussions seldom extend too far outside of the nine definitions.
There are, of course, many unofficial and semi-official variants upon these definitions, but in combined meaning they more or less constitute the background framework for how MIND is conceptualized here on Earth.
At first take, it seems that at least definitions (1) through (7), when taken altogether, do constitute a neat knowledge package about what mind is.
But if those definitions are contemplated even slightly more deeply, it turns out that they are mostly describing PRODUCTS of mind, not mind itself, and indeed, describing only a very few mind’s many possible products.
Furthermore, there is no direct reference to information and knowledge packages – although such can be thought of as somehow implicit among the definitions.
It can also be noticed that although “intellectual ability” is mentioned, INTELLIGENCE is not. (And even more surprisingly, as will be discussed ahead, the definitions of INTELLIGENCE do not incorporate any of the definitions of MIND.)
Last, but not the least of it all, the official definitions of MIND give no hint or clue as to the real existence of the remarkable powers of mind, and which, it might be said with some certainty, are absolutely necessary for a mind to call itself a mind.
Indeed, it can easily be conceptualized that a mind cannot be thought of as one if it just sits like a bump on a log. Clearly, mind MUST have powers to function at all.
ONE PROBABLE REASON WHY HUMAN DEFINITIONS OF MIND ARE NOT VERY EXTENSIVE
The foregoing human definitions of MIND might not be considered a total flop within average Earthside frames of reference.
But if and when those definitions might be utilized to consider and analyze the possible dimensions of ET advanced minds elsewhere in the cosmos, the success rate of such an analysis might not be very high.
Therefore, it is worthwhile, as a brief aside, to discuss one probable Earthside reason having to do with why mind is so poorly and inefficiently defined within the context of our species.
On Earth, the real existence of the human mind and its extensive powers has long been treated this way and that within different contexts.
Those contexts are usually SOCIETAL in purpose and function, and so the ways in which the mind is treated usually have more to do with societal structures and controls, and less to do with the fuller and bigger nature of the human mind itself.
This clearly means, at least in some full part, that human societal arrangements on Earth are NOT built upon a fuller and more extensive appreciation of the human mind and its powers.
Rather, the various kinds of societal structures are far more likely to be built ONLY upon so-called “normalizing” patterns of thinking that reinforce the presumed authenticity of the structures themselves.
It is because of this normalizing utility within societal groupings that patterns of thinking are usually seen as far more important than trying to discover the larger nature of the human mind itself.
The whole of this becomes abundantly clear when it is realized that all social ordering is principally based upon ratios of tolerance and intolerance between what should be and what should not be thought. And this is more or less the historical case within Earth’s manifold societies.
Thinking is, of course, a product or an output of the human mind. But if the societal and cultural emphasis is on the product or output of the mind, then the larger and more intimate nature of the mind itself will not come into view.
In fact, it is CONVENIENT within most societal contexts on Earth that the larger and more intimate nature of the mind itself should NOT come into view. Indeed, in some past societies, inquiring into the larger nature of the mind has been prohibited.
The best reason for this has two easily observed parts.
The first is that most societal structures tacitly and unofficially admit that there is much more to the human mind than meets the average eye or even the average intelligence.
But the second part has to do not with what the mind IS, but with establishing what a mind should and should not think in order to fit more appropriately into a given societal structure.
It is thus seen more useful that minds be fitted into the parameters of societal structures, and the pursuit of this takes precedence over what the mind is.
The reason for this aside is to point up that within Earth-human frames of reference, the larger and more intimate nature of the human mind is NOT anywhere understood.
The most obvious reason for this is that achieving any larger understanding of the human mind is NOT REALLY NECESSARY in the light of societal contexts that are largely dependent upon what IS and IS NOT to be thought. Indeed, if, for societal ends, thought-thinking can be managed, it does not really matter what the mind IS.
Earth societies probably know much more about thought management than they know about what the human mind actually is. The goal of most societal orders is to mutually integrate the thinking of many individuals so that the desired societal structure will manifest and (hopefully) stay in place thereafter.
THE HUMAN MIND IS UNIQUE (ON PLANET EARTH)
The human species mind on Earth can be thought of as unique – as long as it does not encounter another species mind that is equivalent or more advanced.
Furthermore, as long as such encounters DO NOT come about, humans will not feel much need to discover more about what mind fundamentally consists of. Indeed, a mind species on a given planet having no equivalent mind competitors, so to speak, can afford the societal luxury of not discovering too much about its own mind.
If, however, such encounters should come to pass, then a necessity for information and knowledge packages about MIND would become explicit enough.
THE POSSIBLE EXISTENCE OF ET MIND-INTELLIGENCE
If one begins to hypothesize the possibility of ET intelligences, one necessarily sets into motion, without realizing it, subtle changes having to do with how we think of ourselves. We will ultimately have to wonder if and how the formats of our own Earth-based intelligence stack up against ET formats which might be encountered elsewhere, or FROM elsewhere.
A number of unfamiliar, and rather complicated, problem-like situations would download from this kind of hypothetical inquiry.
Among the first of these is that our own Earth-based ideas and/or knowledge regarding MIND and INTELLIGENCE would have to be studied more objectively, and examined in the larger contexts of our species as a whole.
If ET civilizations should give evidence of being advanced over our Earth-based civilizations, then various kinds of cognitive crisis would begin to unfold on our part having to do with our own limited, and thus inefficient, ideas-knowledge of mind, etc.
Earth-based thinking about civilizations more or less equates them with particular societal formats that not only achieve long-term existence, but also produce constructive order in various departments of communalizing activity.
It is thus understood by literate Earth people that Earth has experienced numerous societal civilizations that have arisen and declined. However, the idea of instituting constructive and communalizing order has not yet been applied, by humans, to their species as a whole.
As indicated earlier, it is thus that Earth-based ideas of mind and intelligence are left to various kinds of societal orders, each of which shapes those ideas in limiting ways that serve the societal frameworks, but none of which can be completely applied to our species as a whole.
It is because of this that the nature of mind and intelligence at our species level has been left unexamined.
One of the obvious results is that although “mind” can be thought of within the contexts of various (and always transitory) socio-cultural levels, the nature of our species mind has been left unexamined.
This kind of thing permits two major options regarding the possibility of ET mind-intelligence elsewhere in the cosmos.