Giorgio Piacenza

 Can we make wiser collective decisions as one human family, save ourselves from extinction along with the living world in which we are immersed (and should be wise stewards of)? Are we as a species more flexible to self-construct ourselves, our societies, or do we necessarily have to go slowly through developmental stages until reaching those associated with universalist values? The new magnus opus (seven years in the making) "The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity" by Graeber and Wengrow challenges the developmental, evolutionary view of stage-by-stage progression typically associated with Integral Theory, but is it accurate or is it a reflection of the authors ultra-egalitarian, even anarchist, "green altitude" thinking?   Depending on how valid the main thesis of the book is, it would bring hope to the possibilities that humanity may have by showing that at least it is more possible to re-define ourselves experimentally in different social arrang...

  Four significant participants from recognized institutions provided statements that apparently set the stage for others to take the UAP issue (and possible implications) much more seriously. Something of potential importance is afoot. A major taboo is being erased. First, the Dean of the National Cathedral, Reverend Randolph Marshall Hollerith gave a brief introduction. He didn't think that any space brethren could be here due to vast distances was the chief priest at the National (Anglican) Cathedral, the Very Reverend Randolph Marshall Hollerith . However, he was in favor of facilitating research and – given sufficient evidence - of changing his mind. Moreover, he said that while the discovery of non-human intelligent life in the universe would challenge anthropocentrism, that in itself would not necessarily harm a religious perspective if we consider that the crucial thing is that God loves us. I agreed and found that he was preparing his church beyond quandary that humanity...