Printable View
Lucid dream techniques are not always good. The one problem is that every one is different. That means that some things do not work well others might. Lots of people give up beacause something is not working. Like meditation you spend hours reading on ways to do it but what you read may not work out. What I think is the LD techniques should be taken as a guide line. It is your job to create and develope your own way. By doing this you may get better results.
What do you think?
I completely agree. You should really only be using the methods as guidelines as to how to develop your own technique for inducing lucid dreams.
Some people I bet even have thier own abbreviations for different techniques they do.
I completely and considerately disagree with your primary point.
You haven't defined "good", so I'll make the logical assumption that you use the term "good" to mean "effective for everyone". Of course techniques aren't going to work for everyone who tries them - that's why there are so many.
I do agree that they should be taken as guidelines - and surprise! They are. Lucid dream induction is all about your mind, your imagination, your experience. Techniques are provided and shared and further developed to provide you the knowledge that others have already discovered in their experiences, so you may take ideas and lucid dream in your own way.
There are those who feel the incessant need to make yet another "new" technique to induce lucid dreaming, there are those who are just fine going by the rules they've read online or in ETWOLD, and there are those who can bounce around to whatever techniques - custom or common - to try new things. That being said, all a technique is is a guideline. It's how they're interpreted and applied that makes them "good" or "bad" for the users. If you're a person who takes it word for word, and it works consistently, then it's good for you. If you modify it, and it works consistently, then it's good for you.
If techniques aren't always "good", then why are they here? For us to learn from? Yeah, that's it, precisely.