Is there any real difference between reality and a dream?

[Buckethead]

I'm skipping the thread here, but I'll point out I think this question is very related to ethics and morality. The real world is where we and other people exist. You are not morally responsible for killing an imaginary dream ninja. You are morally responsible for killing your real neighbor.

One thing you can say about the difference between reality and a dream is that reality is where morality and ethics must live.

Interesting point, but not quite true. I had a lucid dream where I tried to take advantage of someone (which normally is pretty easy) and was met with disapproval from this person. I was surprised by the disapproval (this had never happened up to this point) and was compelled to back off out of courtesy and for moral reasons. Go figure!

 

[Buckethead]

I find the "lucid dreaming" thing I see gathering popularity on the internet rather funny.

Since I was a child, I had the ability to stop, rewind, and change whatever I was dreaming. I called it "directed dreaming" when I described it to people, because I was like a movie director. Of course, this as after I realized other people did not have the ability to control their dreams. I can also create dreams by starting the dream before I fall asleep. If I awake from a dream, I can decide if I want to continue the dream when I go back to sleep. In other words, I'd say that I am aware and in control perpaps 98% of the time. That doesn't mean that I think that I am able to go other places *in reality* in a dream. No.

I had belonged to a newsgroup called alt.out-of-body about 10 years ago which was at the time an incredibly active community of people that experienced both lucid dreams and out of body experiences. It was at that time that I realized how many people experienced this phenomenon. I had always felt special about it, having experience this for over 35 years, but now realize that it is much more common. Still one has to be very careful when talking to people in person as there are still vastly more folks who think it's pure lunacy. It is, as you say, becoming more and more popular as the forums about it continue to pop up and I suppose it's similar to any minority simply coming out of the closet as the fears and phobias around it start to disapate.

Like you, I also have the ability to wake, then go back to the same place I was. Gotta see what happens next after all. Also DaveC just mentioned that he has the ability to be in a state of not remembering his current thoughts over and over and I can do that too. I can also project my sense of sight to a remote non-real location while knowing my current location simultaneously. In addition I am able to comprehend something truly incomprehensible at certain times but the comprehension of course soon vanishes to be lost for good (these are my moments of "pure insight"). There is quite a bit about the "dream" world that is really making itself into popular discussions and I think it's just great.

 

[magpies]

About a page back I saw people talking about responsiblitys we have in dreams and such... I would say the type of person you are will play out in the dream. If you are a person who is likely to shoot someone attacking you I would guess you would probably do the same in a dream.

Also talking about rewinding dreams is interesting or being able to control the dream your going to have. I personaly don't think I would even wants to be able to do that... So perhaps that is part of the reason why I haven't yet?

 

[DaveC426913]

I had belonged to a newsgroup called alt.out-of-body about 10 years ago which was at the time an incredibly active community of people that experienced both lucid dreams and out of body experiences. It was at that time that I realized how many people experienced this phenomenon. I had always felt special about it, having experience this for over 35 years, but now realize that it is much more common. Still one has to be very careful when talking to people in person as there are still vastly more folks who think it's pure lunacy. It is, as you say, becoming more and more popular as the forums about it continue to pop up and I suppose it's similar to any minority simply coming out of the closet as the fears and phobias around it start to disapate.

Wait a minute. Out-of-body experience is a different block of cheese.

All the other phenomena we've mentioned are entirely internal to the person. They're simply things happening in the brain. Out-of-body experiences (that are claimed to be genuine) are studyable - and falsifiable.

And yeah, people will have a big objection to this one. There is no known mechanism that allows one's perception to leave one's body. That one needs to be demionstrated satisfactorily before you'll get any buy-in.

I can also project my sense of sight to a remote non-real location while knowing my current location simultaneously.

I don't understand this one. I am currently projecting my sense of sight to Jupiter. Are you suggesting you have some form of genuine clairvoyance?

In addition I am able to comprehend something truly incomprehensible at certain times but the comprehension of course soon vanishes to be lost for good (these are my moments of "pure insight").

Others call these moments of "being stoned".

All seriounsess aside. One of the problems with the brain is that it possible to have the brain think something is truly profound, but that doesn't mean it really is. The feeling of profundity can be switched on independent of the presence of anything actually happening. It is a portion of the brain that actually assigns a feeling of importance to events. (This is often cited as the source of profound zeal seen in accounts such as divine visitation and UFO encounters.)

 

[Freeman Dyson]

Yeah, that guy who first proved lucid dreaming has written extensively on NDE and OBE. He says they are totally explained by biology and not supernatural at all. Some kind of sensory cutoff is happening.

I can't totally rule them out though I guess..

Anyway, here is some more interesting comments by him:

RMN: There seems to be a correlation between psychedelic consciousness and lucid consciousness in the dream state.

Stephen: There’s a lot in common between the two states. In fact people can in the dream state, take a dream "psychedelic" and have it produce an effect.

DJB: Terence McKenna says that he smokes DMT in his dreams and then has the full experience.

Stephen: And what that shows is that what prevents us from having these experiences is not the chemical, it’s the mental framework. So in a way psychedelics can be a kind of guide in revealing some of the potential in the mind. I think they have limitations in terms of taking us to the visions they show us. One can take the mistaken path of saying, well since I had the taste of it with the substance, if I keep taking it I’ll eventually get the whole thing because more of the same should help. It doesn’t seem to work that way.

Good interview really:

http://www.futurehi.net/docs/Laberge_WakingDreamer.html

 

[Buckethead]

Wait a minute. Out-of-body experience is a different block of cheese.

All the other phenomena we've mentioned are entirely internal to the person. They're simply things happening in the brain. Out-of-body experiences (that are claimed to be genuine) are studyable - and falsifiable.

And yeah, people will have a big objection to this one. There is no known mechanism that allows one's perception to leave one's body. That one needs to be demionstrated satisfactorily before you'll get any buy-in.

OBE and Lucid dreaming are considered by many practitioners to be one in the same while others consider them as you say. Other's still are on the fence. It's a massive topic of debate in the OBE/Lucid circles. Here is the problem (from my personal experience). OBE's are loaded with hallucinations. You can slip out in your bedroom notice the usual stuff around your bedroom but discover your bedroom dresser is against the wrong wall. Step out the bedroom door into the hallway and find yourself in someone else's living room. Too much is the same to dismiss it as a dream, yet the differences between what you see and what you know to be reality differ. The consistancy here is very high. Exiting during an OBE from a waking state causes this kind of thing to happen over and over. Other consistant things happen during OBEs as well that don't happen during lucid dreams.

I don't understand this one. I am currently projecting my sense of sight to Jupiter. Are you suggesting you have some form of genuine clairvoyance?

Others call these moments of "being stoned".

I was differentiating between an OBE where all of me goes somewhere to just having my sense of sight (and sound) be able to travel as if it were a remote camera connected to me in my home. I know I am in bed, yet can see clearly someplace else.

I was careful to state that I could project my sight to a non-physical place. I've never been able to do this to a place I could verify so I can't say I have genuine clarvoyance.

All seriounsess aside. One of the problems with the brain is that it possible to have the brain think something is truly profound, but that doesn't mean it really is. The feeling of profundity can be switched on independent of the presence of anything actually happening. It is a portion of the brain that actually assigns a feeling of importance to events. (This is often cited as the source of profound zeal seen in accounts such as divine visitation and UFO encounters.)

I don't dispute these discoveries. Also probing certain areas of the brain can cause spontaneous OBEs. However, the extreme nature of human consciousness with respect to what we know of through physics about reality leaves me to think of these observations as just another piece of the puzzle but certainly not highly illuminating. The experiences I've had of momentary extreme clarity and knowledge was accompanied by full analytical processing of what I was experiencing to the degree that I could teach it to someone at that moment in English sentences. Alas, the clarity so quickly disappears and with it a real sense of loss. Still I do not dismiss that it can be a brain trick, but I think it's unlikely.

 

[Buckethead]

Yeah, that guy who first proved lucid dreaming has written extensively on NDE and OBE. He says they are totally explained by biology and not supernatural at all. Some kind of sensory cutoff is happening.

I can't totally rule them out though I guess..

I am familiar with Leberge's work and we've had some email discussions. Although I can appreciate his work on Lucid Dreaming, I (and many others) don't agree with his assessment that OBEs are just lucid dreams and I have clearly expressed my opinions to him about this. Still, we all just have our opinions.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

I am familiar with Leberge's work and we've had some email discussions. Although I can appreciate his work on Lucid Dreaming, I (and many others) don't agree with his assessment that OBEs are just lucid dreams and I have clearly expressed my opinions to him about this. Still, we all just have our opinions.

That's pretty cool that you have communicated with him about this.

 

[Buckethead]

That's pretty cool that you have communicated with him about this.

I think it's cool communicating with people in this forum.

 

[DaveC426913]

OBE and Lucid dreaming are considered by many practitioners to be one in the same while others consider them as you say. Other's still are on the fence. It's a massive topic of debate in the OBE/Lucid circles.

I guess I'm behind the times.

Where I come from lucid dreaming simply means the ability to be conscious and aware and in control while dreaming.

Here is the problem (from my personal experience). OBE's are loaded with hallucinations. You can slip out in your bedroom notice the usual stuff around your bedroom but discover your bedroom dresser is against the wrong wall. Step out the bedroom door into the hallway and find yourself in someone else's living room. Too much is the same to dismiss it as a dream, yet the differences between what you see and what you know to be reality differ. The consistancy here is very high. Exiting during an OBE from a waking state causes this kind of thing to happen over and over. Other consistant things happen during OBEs as well that don't happen during lucid dreams.

OBE must be pretty easy to verify or falsify. The ol' write number on a piece of paper and place it on top of a tall bookcase is a common test. I've never heard of it being verified.

I was differentiating between an OBE where all of me goes somewhere to just having my sense of sight (and sound) be able to travel as if it were a remote camera connected to me in my home. I know I am in bed, yet can see clearly someplace else.

But what about this makes it any more than a type of dream? Dreaming that your sense of sight is somewhere remote is simply a "dream" thing, somewhat akin to dreaming that you're flying. What leads you to believe there is more to it?

 

[Buckethead]

I guess I'm behind the times.

Where I come from lucid dreaming simply means the ability to be conscious and aware and in control while dreaming.

And you would be correct, that is the definition of a lucid dream.

OBE must be pretty easy to verify or falsify. The ol' write number on a piece of paper and place it on top of a tall bookcase is a common test. I've never heard of it being verified.

I've heard of it being verified, but what can one really say about that? I've tried this experiment myself and have failed which doesn't surprise me. It's not an easy experiment to perform. One might have to wait weeks for an OBE and when the time comes you might find the paper isn't where you put it, or you read it and you can't read it, or you can read it and not remember the number when you return (no matter how much you repeat it in your head so you can remember it) or you can remember it and it's the wrong number. What does this say? Well scientifically the standard model would be that it's just a dream and in some sense that would be correct. But this is a very primitive standard model IMO.

The reason I think it's important to move beyond the standard model is because of the conflict between what we usually think of as a dream and what one experiences during an OBE (or even lucid dream). Is a dream just "something we do at night" or does it go beyond that? One of the key points when defining reality is the uncanny sense that we are really here doing whatever it is we are doing. We are experiencing reality as fully conscious awake entities. If someone asks, "Is this real?" and we are awake, we can answer yes, because we can think and feel and react and experience with all that we are. If one is "dreaming" but experiencing exactly the same thing, then what do you call that? One difference between waking and conscious dreaming might be that we return to waking consistantly, but I have returned to the same place during an OBE as well, just not to the same degree. And as Dyson mentioned earlier, the laws of physics can be really twisted in the dreamscape which can add to the confusion about what is real and what is not. Is reality a place where there are certain laws of physics, Newtonian laws for example, and if these laws don't exist, are we allowed to call this a non-reality? I'll say that waking reality is "more" real than an OBE reality for the reasons I just gave, but I'd be really careful about calling an OBE "just a dream". And why is this important? I think that investigating this further might lead to some insight about some of the stuff that goes on behind the curtain of what we think of as reality. What about non-locality? Is this phenomenon somehow tied in with OBE or lucid dreams? It's easy to dismiss, but we are at such a brick wall in this area I wouldn't dismiss anything.

But what about this makes it any more than a type of dream? Dreaming that your sense of sight is somewhere remote is simply a "dream" thing, somewhat akin to dreaming that you're flying. What leads you to believe there is more to it?

I actually didn't say it was different than a type of dream, I just said it's different than an OBE. But to take your question further the devil is in the details. Whenever I have standard dreams, they involve the totallity of me being in the dream. A remote viewing is where you are fully aware you are laying in bed, but you can clearly see and hear a remote location and move the "camera" around at will to examine details as if looking at a real object. Also the remote location seems "stable" unlike let's say the unstable images of a typical mental image.

 

[DaveC426913]

A remote viewing is where you are fully aware you are laying in bed, but you can clearly see and hear a remote location and move the "camera" around at will to examine details as if looking at a real object. Also the remote location seems "stable" unlike let's say the unstable images of a typical mental image.

Ah. Never had one of those.

 

[Sorry!]

Why exactly has the conversation shifted to OBEs? Bucket if you think that you are having OBEs you should probably check yourself into a hospital...

It is something that is falsifiable and it has been multiple times... I have never heard of it being 'proven' by any sort of credible source beyond crackpottery.

 

[Buckethead]

Why exactly has the conversation shifted to OBEs? Bucket if you think that you are having OBEs you should probably check yourself into a hospital...

It is something that is falsifiable and it has been multiple times... I have never heard of it being 'proven' by any sort of credible source beyond crackpottery.

Alas, my comments about fears and phobias stand.

 

[DaveC426913]

Alas, my comments about fears and phobias stand.

How do you equate skepticism with fear and phobia? Skepticism is rational.

Is there any verification of OBE?

 

[Buckethead]

How do you equate skepticism with fear and phobia? Skepticism is rational.

Is there any verification of OBE?

I was equating rude comments about hospital visits with fears and phobias.

Is there any verification of Strings? Branes? Multiple dimensions? Advanced alien life? Should one abandon explorations of these areas because there is none? Should one check oneself into a hospital because one is studying String Theory?

 

[Sorry!]

I was equating rude comments about hospital visits with fears and phobias.

Is there any verification of Strings? Branes? Multiple dimensions? Advanced alien life? Should one abandon explorations of these areas because there is none? Should one check oneself into a hospital because one is studying String Theory?

These things are all falsifiable and when the evidence suggests they are not true PEACE OUT. Observation supports all theories you spoke of in one way or another. So why should we abandon these areas?

OBE on the other hand has been many times tested. Post some links to a credible sourced peer review references and maybe I won't be so rude to you.

 

[DaveC426913]

I was equating rude comments about hospital visits with fears and phobias.

Is there any verification of Strings? Branes? Multiple dimensions? Advanced alien life? Should one abandon explorations of these areas because there is none? Should one check oneself into a hospital because one is studying String Theory?

Hm. This may not be the best forum for you after all. Of all the fora there are out there on the web, this one is probably the most diligent about adhering to established science.

Not only will you get a lot of skeptics demanding citation of reliable evidence, but it is very likely that the thread will get locked for violating its rules about speculation, thus:

One of the main goals of PF is to help students learn the current status of physics as practiced by the scientific community; accordingly, Physicsforums.com strives to maintain high standards of academic integrity. There are many open questions in physics, and we welcome discussion on those subjects provided the discussion remains intellectually sound. It is against our Posting Guidelines to discuss, in most of the PF forums or in blogs, new or non-mainstream theories or ideas that have not been published in professional peer-reviewed journals or are not part of current professional mainstream scientific discussion. Personal theories/Independent Research may be submitted to our Independent Research Forum, provided they meet our Independent Research Guidelines; Personal theories posted elsewhere will be deleted. Poorly formulated personal theories, unfounded challenges of mainstream science, and overt crackpottery will not be tolerated anywhere on the site.

 

[DanP]

Any of you can shift into a wolf ?

 

[DaveC426913]

Any of you can shift into a wolf ?

Stop that!

 

[Sorry!]

Any of you can shift into a wolf ?

Well somewhat... only that I have wings and can fly in as far as the moon... no farther though the air past that point is too limited!

I think dave wants to keep this discussion on a serious track tho him and freeman were having pretty good convo.

 

[DaveC426913]

Any of you can shift into a wolf ?

Wait. You mean like, in your dreams?

I thought you were just mocking Buckethead...

 

[DanP]

I thought you were just mocking Buckethead...

No way, I don't have the balls to mock anyone on this site.

 

[Evo]

I had belonged to a newsgroup called alt.out-of-body about 10 years ago which was at the time an incredibly active community of people that experienced both lucid dreams and out of body experiences. It was at that time that I realized how many people experienced this phenomenon. I had always felt special about it, having experience this for over 35 years, but now realize that it is much more common. Still one has to be very careful when talking to people in person as there are still vastly more folks who think it's pure lunacy. It is, as you say, becoming more and more popular as the forums about it continue to pop up and I suppose it's similar to any minority simply coming out of the closet as the fears and phobias around it start to disapate.

Like you, I also have the ability to wake, then go back to the same place I was. Gotta see what happens next after all. Also DaveC just mentioned that he has the ability to be in a state of not remembering his current thoughts over and over and I can do that too. I can also project my sense of sight to a remote non-real location while knowing my current location simultaneously. In addition I am able to comprehend something truly incomprehensible at certain times but the comprehension of course soon vanishes to be lost for good (these are my moments of "pure insight"). There is quite a bit about the "dream" world that is really making itself into popular discussions and I think it's just great.

We definitely differ here as I realize a dream is only a dream, it is not real. You can dream that you are on another planet, then you wake up and you're in your bed.

Being able to control dreams is just an ability some people have. But it is still only a dream.

There is a craze right now with the lucid dreaming thing where people are convincing themselves that they can alter reality. Oy.

 

[Buckethead]

We definitely differ here as I realize a dream is only a dream, it is not real. You can dream that you are on another planet, then you wake up and you're in your bed.

Being able to control dreams is just an ability some people have. But it is still only a dream.

There is a craze right now with the lucid dreaming thing where people are convincing themselves that they can alter reality. Oy.

I think I'm being misunderstood. I never said that a lucid dream or any other kind of mental state while asleep is reality as we commonly understand it or that it is something other than the commonly accepted defintion of a dream. I simply find it curious that under certain circumstances a dream can appear to be an actual reality in the way that we commonly test reality such as presence of mind, stability of the environment and so on. The degree to which this seems to happen is more than normal and that is all I'm claiming. The undertow of ridicule that has shown up in the last few posts I find very offensive and I'm actually surprised by it as I find most everyone here to be open minded and curious about things we don't yet have a full understanding of. But Dave is right, perhaps this isn't a subject for this forum. I didn't start the thread by the way.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think I'm being misunderstood. I never said that a lucid dream or any other kind of mental state while asleep is reality as we commonly understand it or that it is something other than the commonly accepted defintion of a dream. I simply find it curious that under certain circumstances a dream can appear to be an actual reality in the way that we commonly test reality such as presence of mind, stability of the environment and so on.

Wait. So are you saying that you're only talking about types of dreams? When you talk about "out of body" experiences that's a paranormal phenomenon. Did I misunderstand?

I'm confused.

The degree to which this seems to happen is more than normal and that is all I'm claiming.

What do you mean "more than normal"? what do you mean by "normal"?

 

[Buckethead]

Wait. So are you saying that you're only talking about types of dreams? When you talk about "out of body" experiences that's a paranormal phenomenon. Did I misunderstand?

I'm confused.

Geez, this is hard to explain because there is a preconception of what a "dream" is and I don't think this preconception is all that helpful. It's simply not so cut and dried as you are making it out to be. Yes, it's a type of dream but I have to be careful when I say that because of that word "dream". OK, let's just cut to the chase. In your opinion how do you define reality? Break it down to the nuts and bolts. Is it stability? Is it because it always seems to be around? Is it because of how "real" it feels? What?

"out of body" does not just refer to interaction with our common known reality BTW and that's what makes it particularly tricky.

What do you mean "more than normal"? what do you mean by "normal"?

By more than normal I only mean that there is a "standard dream" that we all can relate to and when one is conscious and in control and the dream becomes more real than we expect then this might be considered more than normal.

 

[Entropee]

There are different realities other than this one, people just tend to only classify reality as concrete things. The universe is a very mysterious place.

 

[Sorry!]

Personally, I'm still waiting for the peer-review references for this stuff. Seems you've changed your position on out of body experiences.
They no longer mean out of body but merely 'in a dream'? (non-standard dream that is... whatever that means)

I define reality as what I can perceive and reason based on these perceptions. Nothing to do with because it is stable or because it is always around. If I woke up and my perceptions told me I was in China I would not think I wasn't in reality.
Of course it's because how 'real' it feels we do call it reality. How else would reality feel, fake? How could you make such a comparison anyways?

Anyways before I continue post your
A) References
and
B) Definitions of words or concepts you have. (I.e. Dreams have a definition they have already been defined within this thread as well and you seem to be saying we have no idea what we're talking about with regards to dreams... so enlighten us)

 

[DanP]

I simply find it curious that under certain circumstances a dream can appear to be an actual reality in the way that we commonly test reality such as presence of mind, stability of the environment and so on. .

Is the world you see after you take a psychotropic drug "reality" ?

Are hallucinations defining a new reality ? Is seeing and talking to your long dead uncle a reality ? No matter that you are the only one who can see it ?

Is a schizophrenic experiencing reality ?

Is dreaming that you make sex with the weather girl from TV reality? No matter the reality is that you don't stand a chance in hell to score her ?


Reality is independent of perceptions and beliefs. It simply is. It doesn't need validation in the mind of a human. The weather girl is safe.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

We definitely differ here as I realize a dream is only a dream, it is not real. You can dream that you are on another planet, then you wake up and you're in your bed.

Being able to control dreams is just an ability some people have. But it is still only a dream.

There is a craze right now with the lucid dreaming thing where people are convincing themselves that they can alter reality. Oy.

But can these dreams tell you more about yourself? Can one use the "fakeness" of dreams to find out more of their real selves? This is what the guy who first proved lucid dreaming is always talking about. Lucid dreaming helps you unlock your highest potential. It reveals to you your deepest identity. Your conscious self(or the ego, as Freud would call it) is not all that you are. There are other layers. Dreaming can help you see these other layers.

"Let’s suppose I’m having a lucid dream. The first thing I think is, "Oh this is a dream, here I am." Now the "I" here is who I think Stephen is. Now what’s happening in fact is that Stephen is asleep in bed somewhere, not in this world at all, and he’s having a dream that he’s in this room talking to you. With a little bit of lucidity I’d say, "this is a dream, and you’re all in my dream." A little more lucidity and I’d know you’re a dream figure and this is a dream-table, and this must be a dream-shirt and a dream-watch and what’s this? It’s got to be a dream-hand and well, so what’s this? It’s a dream-Stephen! So a moment ago I thought this is who I am and now I know that it’s just a mental model of who I am. So reasoning along those lines, I thought, I’d like to have a sense of what my deepest identity is, what’s my highest potential, which level is the realest in a sense? With that in mind at the beginning of a lucid dream, I was driving in my sports car down through the green, Spring countryside. I see an attractive hitchhiker at the side of the road, thought of picking her up but said, "No, I’ve already had that dream, I want this to be a representation of my highest potential. So the moment I had that thought and decided to forgo the immediate pleasure, the car started to fly into the air and the car disappeared and my body, also. There were symbols of traditional religions in the clouds, the Star of David and the cross and the steeple and near-eastern symbols. As I passed through that realm, higher beyond the clouds, I entered into a vast emptiness of space that was infinite and it was filled with potential and love. And the feeling I had was-- this is home! This is where I’m from and I’d forgotten that it was here. I was overwhelmed with joy about the fact that this source of being was immediately present, that it was always here, and I had not been seeing it because of what was in my way. So I started singing for joy with a voice that spanned three or four octaves and resonated with the cosmos with words like, "I Praise Thee, O Lord!" There wasn’t any I, there was no thee, no Lord, no duality somehow but sort of, ‘Praise Be’ was the feeling of it. My belief is that the experience I had of this void, that’s what you get if you take away the brain. When I thought about the meaning of that, I recognized that the deepest identity I had there was the source of being, the all and nothing that was here right now, that was what I was too, in addition to being Stephen. So the analogy that I use for understanding this is that we have these separate snowflake identities. Every snowflake is different in the same sense that each one of us is, in fact, distinct. So here is death, and here’s the snowflake and we’re falling into the infinite ocean. So what do we fear? We fear that we’re going to lose our identity, we’ll be melted, dissolved in that ocean and we’ll be gone; but what may happen is that the snowflake hits the ocean and feels an infinite expansion of identity and realizes, what I was in essence, was water! So we’re each one of these little frozen droplets and we feel only our individuality, but not our substance, but our essential substance is common to everything in that sense, so now God is the ocean. So we’re each a little droplet of that ocean, identifying only with the form of the droplet and not with the majesty and the unity."

-Laberge

"The unconscious plays a role that is far from being fully understood. Like all the higher forms of life, man is in tune with the living beings around him to a remarkable degree. He perceives their sufferings and problems, their positive and negative attributes and values, instinctively-quite independently of his conscious thoughts about other people. Our dream life allows us to have a look at these subliminal perceptions and shows us that they have an effect upon us."

-Freud

 

[DanP]

But can these dreams tell you more about yourself? Can one use the "fakeness" of dreams to find out more of their real selves? This is what the guy who first proved lucid dreaming is always talking about. Lucid dreaming helps you unlock your highest potential. It reveals to you your deepest identity. Your conscious self(or the ego, as Freud would call it) is not all that you are. There are other layers. Dreaming can help you see these other layers.

From a very practical point of view, I don't think they reveal to you "your deepest identity".
"Your deepest identity" may very well be a joke nature plays on you, various levels of gene expression or lack-thereof , which in the end may define your mental processes.

This doesn't mean that they can't be a viable technique of improving cognitive and behavioral processes. They may very well have such an effect.

In sports I seen used many times the so called "Schultz relaxation" technique. Primarily is used to control arousal and anxiety, 2 factors which play a pretty big role in performance. It does work. There are a lot of tricks you can learn to improve your mind processes.

But it has nothing to do with "reality"

 

[Freeman Dyson]

From a very practical point of view, I don't think they reveal to you "your deepest identity".
"Your deepest identity" may very well be a joke nature plays on you, various levels of gene expression or lack-thereof , which in the end may define your mental processes.

This doesn't mean that they can't be a viable technique of improving cognitive and behavioral processes. They may very well have such an effect.

In sports I seen used many times the so called "Schultz relaxation" technique. Primarily is used to control arousal and anxiety, 2 factors which play a pretty big role in performance. It does work. There are a lot of tricks you can learn to improve your mind processes.

But it has nothing to do with "reality"

Ya, I mean, I think dreams are symptoms of real problems. Like anxiety. Anxiety and other mental states can invoke certain dreams.

 

[DanP]

"The unconscious plays a role that is far from being fully understood. Like all the higher forms of life, man is in tune with the living beings around him to a remarkable degree. He perceives their sufferings and problems, their positive and negative attributes and values, instinctively-quite independently of his conscious thoughts about other people. Our dream life allows us to have a look at these subliminal perceptions and shows us that they have an effect upon us."

-Freud

Well, we do not need conscious thought to do a lot of things. For example, I don't need conscious thoughts to start my bowl movement. Its an autonomous process. I wonder whatever my dreams can help me see into my bowl movement. And surely, this process has a big effect upon me.

I wouldn't be too shocked to learn that some mental processes may very well be the same, having a very high degree of autonomy.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

Well, we do not need conscious thought to do a lot of things. For example, I don't need conscious thoughts to start my bowl movement. Its an autonomous process. I wonder whatever my dreams can help me see into my bowl movement. And surely, this process has a big effect upon me.

I wouldn't be too shocked to learn that some mental processes may very well be the same, having a very high degree of autonomy.

I'm thinking more along the lines of intuition. That's what genius really is. A stroke of genius is really a stroke of intuition. It comes out of nowhere. Not the product of linear, conscious thought.

"It is better for people to be like the beasts...they should be more intuitive; they should not be too conscious of what they are doing while they are doing it."

-Einstein

"There is no logical way to the discovery of these elemental laws. There is only the way of intuition, which is helped by a feeling for the order lying behind the appearance."

-Einstein

"The intellect has little to do on the road to discovery. There comes a leap in consciousness, call it intuition or what you will, and the solution comes to you and you don't know how or why."

-Einstein

 

[DanP]

Ya, I mean, I think dreams are symptoms of real problems. Like anxiety. Anxiety and other mental states can invoke certain dreams.

Sure, but I think that molecular biology has a better chance for now to advance the field than psychological than interpretation of dreams. "Molecular psychology", if you will...

By the same token ,psychoanalysis is great, awesome, a great revenue generator for psycho-therapists, but I believe its a highly inefficient technique of "healing". I bet molecular medicine
will yield better results in shorter time.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

Sure, but I think that molecular biology has a better chance for now to advance the field than psychological than interpretation of dreams. "Molecular psychology", if you will...

By the same token ,psychoanalysis is great, awesome, a great revenue generator for psycho-therapists, but I believe its a highly inefficient technique of "healing". I bet molecular medicine
will yield better results in shorter time.

lol. I will not defend the scientific rigor of psychoanalysis. i know it has mainly fell out of favor. but the study of dreams is still really a protoscience from any angle because of lack of technology. I mean, how do we even know that the person is being honest about the dreams they are having? I think we will have to wait until we can actually project dreams on a screen or something.

 

[DanP]

I'm thinking more along the lines of intuition. That's what genius really is. A stroke of genius is really a stroke of intuition. It comes out of nowhere. Not the product of linear, conscious thought.

Many quotes and famous last words sound very cool. But in the end, they represent nothing of substance.

That being said, you believe that capacity of abstraction, so useful in math and physics, is a "stroke of intuition" or a highly conscious process ? I believe the latter.

Special relativity came in 1905. It took 10 years of work for Einstein to come out with General Relativity. Why , if it was a stroke a intuition ? Because I believe it was not. It was due to highly conscious processes, a lot of abstraction, and was built upon his previous relativity work. It didn't came from nowhere, it was the product of many years of work and highly grounded in his previous theories.

Intuition fail humans very often. Use intuition alone in business negotiations for example, and you have all the chances in the world to end up poor.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

Many quotes and famous last words sound very cool. But in the end, they represent nothing of substance.

That being said, you believe that capacity of abstraction, so useful in math and physics, is a "stroke of intuition" or a highly conscious process ? I believe the latter.

Special relativity came in 1905. It took 10 years of work for Einstein to come out with General Relativity. Why , if it was a stroke a intuition ? Because I believe it was not. It was due to highly conscious processes, a lot of abstraction, and was built upon his previous relativity work. It didn't came from nowhere, it was the product of many years of work and highly grounded in his previous theories.

Intuition fail humans very often. Use intuition alone in business negotiations for example, and you have all the chances in the world to end up poor.

It doesn't fail animals often.

Maybe it was the initial stroke of genius followed up by hard work. Or maybe it was hard work followed by intuition. Hard work alone could not have done it. Einstein, like Fenyman, was an intuitive thinker. It was images or ideas that popped into his head out of nowhere that gave him the initial spark on his work. Even dreams.

I think you should read the book Blink. Intuition is quite genius and you use it even when you don't think you do. The subconscious plays a huge role.

Read the first few pages of the preview to see how smart it can be:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316172324/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[DanP]

It doesn't fail animals often.

No idea, I didnt seen any stats on how often animals are failed by their "intuition". Are you sure it's intuition at all ? Maybe it's just a response to stimulus you as a human can't perceive. Your smell is highly ineffective. You can't sense ultrasounds. You can't sense the Earth magnetic field directly, and the list can continue.

What you call "intuition" in animals may very well processes determined by sensory information you simply can't perceive.

Maybe it was the initial stroke of genius followed up by hard work. Or maybe it was hard work followed by intuition. Hard work alone could not have done it. Einstein, like Fenyman, was an intuitive thinker. It was images or ideas that popped into his head out of nowhere that gave him the initial spark on his work. Even dreams.

Is this the same Feynman who wrote on his blackboard "know how to solve every problem that has been solved" ?

Do you really believe that Einstein and Feynman's ideas came out of nowhere ? IMO its ridiculous to think they could have the same "intuitions" without the tremendous math and physics knowledge they amassed. None of them could do what they did without their previous experiences.

And as a last question, how can you know how Feynman or Einstein thought and what popped in their minds ?

 

[Buckethead]

I define reality as what I can perceive and reason based on these perceptions. Nothing to do with because it is stable or because it is always around. If I woke up and my perceptions told me I was in China I would not think I wasn't in reality.

If you are having what is called a Lucid Dream or fully conscious dream, then you are in a position to "perceive and reason based on these perceptions". If you can agree on that then you will have to redefine your definition of reality otherwise you will have included Lucid Dreams in your definition.

Of course it's because how 'real' it feels we do call it reality. How else would reality feel, fake? How could you make such a comparison anyways?

If you are someone suffering from schizophrenia the imaginary person you are talking to seems very real to you so if you define reality as something that "feels real" then again you might be surprised.

The bottom line is, it's not that easy to define reality.

 

[Buckethead]

Is the world you see after you take a psychotropic drug "reality" ?

Are hallucinations defining a new reality ? Is seeing and talking to your long dead uncle a reality ? No matter that you are the only one who can see it ?

Is a schizophrenic experiencing reality ?

Is dreaming that you make sex with the weather girl from TV reality? No matter the reality is that you don't stand a chance in hell to score her ?


Reality is independent of perceptions and beliefs. It simply is. It doesn't need validation in the mind of a human. The weather girl is safe.

I will agree that it is independant on perceptions and beliefs, and it simply is. However, that does not help in defining what reality is as there is much that fits these definitions that is not considered in the mainstream to be reality.

For one example take Schrodinger's Cat. Before we look in the box is the cat dead or alive? Which is real? Is it both dead and alive and is this real? There is speculation that matter is made up of Strings. Are Strings real or are they just a math model? If they are just a math model does this translate into reality at the smallest levels of matter? In other words are strings just non-real pieces of information that on a macroscale reveal themselves as what we perceive to be real?

With regard to hallucinations, one would have to define reality carefully before answering that question. If someone sees an elephant in their living room and 9 other people don't and if reality is defined as what 9 out of 10 people see, then the one person in the room is not seeing anything real. But if 9 people see that elephant and one doesn't then the definition of reality here dictates the elephant exists even if it doesn't. I don't think this is a very good definition of reality either.

So I guess I'll give you my definition of reality (subject to change) and invite you to chime in with your own. Reality is something that requires two things: Mind and Matter. Mind is required because without it, there is simply no existence and there simply is no reality. Matter is required because just having a Mind is like having a spaceship and no planets or stars to go to. It is actually less than that because if there is no Matter, then there can be no thoughts, no thoughts, no reality. So reality is the interaction of Mind and Matter on the grandest scale of the definition. From this point one can break the definition of reality down into sub catagories such as stable waking reality which is the reality I am currently experiencing while I am typing this post. Then there is alternate waking reality which could include visual hallucinations or a a more subtler level how I feel if I am taking something as simple as a Prozac. Then there is reality as experienced when one is asleep which can have various degrees of importance. If one is conscious during a dream and one has the ability to examine (touch, smell, see, hear, taste) matter in that environment, then according to my initial defintion this is also reality. You might argue here that the "matter" in a conscious dream is not real, but there is no way for you to prove that and at the time this is occurring, all tests that I can perform indicate that there is indeed matter here. In addition everyone in the dream can verify that there is matter around them as well. Now I awaken and the matter falls from my view. Did it exist? Suddenly there is a Big Crunch and Earth and the universe is wiped out and we are all dead, Did the Earth exist? Was it real? Well, if this explosion ends up taking with it all matter, and if mind is all that's left, then it is a reality that exists no more. And then there is a Big Bang, mind once again has matter and now we have a new reality.

 

[DaveC426913]

If you are having what is called a Lucid Dream or fully conscious dream, then you are in a position to "perceive and reason based on these perceptions". If you can agree on that then you will have to redefine your definition of reality otherwise you will have included Lucid Dreams in your definition.


If you are someone suffering from schizophrenia the imaginary person you are talking to seems very real to you so if you define reality as something that "feels real" then again you might be surprised.

The bottom line is, it's not that easy to define reality.

Yes it is.

If you knock over a chair in a lucid dream, you will wake up to find that you didn't knock the chair over. While the dreamer may have difficulty determining that he's in a dream while he's in it, that does not prevent him from realizing his mistake once he's awake.

A schizophrenic will hear voices but it can be demonstrated that those voices are internal, not external. His reality includes voice, yes, but that is what makes him delusional.

What you're failing to see is that reality is not simply what the subject thinks it is. Indepedent verification can correct one's misperceptions.

For one example take Schrodinger's Cat. Before we look in the box is the cat dead or alive? Which is real? Is it both dead and alive and is this real?

Invalid example. Schodinger's Cat is recognized as a thought experiment, and is not applicable to reality.

If someone sees an elephant in their living room and 9 other people don't and if reality is defined as what 9 out of 10 people see, then the one person in the room is not seeing anything real. But if 9 people see that elephant and one doesn't then the definition of reality here dictates the elephant exists even if it doesn't.

This is overly-smplistic. Reality is not simply determined by a show of hands.

 

[kote]

What you're failing to see is that reality is not simply what the subject thinks it is. Indepedent verification can correct one's misperceptions.

...Reality is not simply determined by a show of hands.

How do you propose that this independent verification is performed, if not by a show of hands? Science is done exactly by a show of hands: Everyone jump from 1m and time how long it takes you to land. Okay, cool, looks like gravity is 9.8m/s. You got 12m/s? We all got 9.8. You must be wrong.

It seems pretty clear from the problem of induction, however, that it is invalid to infer anything conclusive about objective reality. When you are living your normal life you use certain unjustified operating assumptions, like the assumption that you aren't dreaming. When beginning from a position of doubt and questioning these assumptions, you find that you have no logically valid justification for their belief. That's what makes it hard to define reality, and that's why we're basically limited to a show of hands or some other unjustified method.

How do you, personally, verify that you aren't just imagining the "show of hands?"

I'm assuming here that we're talking about knowledge of an objective materialist reality, as seems to be the trend in the thread.

 

[Sorry!]

Regardless of if it seems absurd that to a person while they dream may think that a lucid dream is reality it is definitely real. Are you trying to say that what they are dreaming is fake... I don't understand they are having a dream and those actions are taking place in this dream.

Whether or not they know they are in the dream doesn't matter. They will soon wake up and realize soon enough it was a dream. If it were say a coma and during a coma you dream then yes that because your 'new' version of reality.

If 1 person out of 10 sees a elephant in a room and uses his reasoning skills to determine that the other 9 other people are incorrect and the elephant is in the room with them then yes this is reality to him. The other 9 people will probably conclude he is delusional but it doesn't change the fact. Instead this helps my definition of reality as being perception based.

The definition of reality that you give seems suspiciously close to the one I gave. Just a few words are altered and a few assumptions are made further than mine (I don't think I grant any assumptions other than we perceive and reason but these are minor assumptions because regardless of your ability to perceive and reason you still live in your reality).

 

[magpies]

The truth about reality is that none of us are actually living in it :) So it could very well be true that this is really just a dream world... Just not like you would think it is. What I wouldn't give to have a full night worth of dreams one day. I don't know if I could control my glee if I did though. Just imagine 8 hours of dreaming of being on sandy beach and fun! I would suspect that I wouldn't wake up as refershed if I did have that experience though. I think the refreshed part comes from having xyz hours pass without realizing it or at least that's what I am most glad about when I do fall asleep... Not having to spend the last 4-6 hours trying to find something interesting to do...