Thread: DILD is the Bubble Sort of Lucid Dreaming

Originally Posted by cmind

But how many people focus all their efforts on DILD, when they have the necessary skill to just do a WILD? Not many.

With all due respect, I don't think you're paying attention (which may be your problem with DILDs, in the first place? hahaha. I kid. ).

I focus my attention on DILD, because it is what gets me the most results. As a kid, I was practically able to DILD at will. Since then, I have - many, many (and I'll say this again, for the people in the back), MANY times - attempted to get better at WILDs. And I will continue to do so, at my leisure. But what has been the painfully consistent outcome is that (probably due to other waking world factors) it's just not the easiest way for me to become lucid.

Maybe when you've been around here long enough, you will see that DILD is the "mainstay" (most common) method for inducing lucid dreams. That is not to say that one method is "superior" to another, which is the picture you are trying to paint. If nothing else, DILD seems to be the easiest. Going further, though: WILDS - when accompanied by the WBTB method - are much easier than just WILDing at the onset of a full night's sleep. Used this way, people tend to have more success with WILDs, because it comes with the added boost of being nearer to (or falling right upon) a REM cycle.

Outside of that, though, you are still providing a conclusion (WILD > DILD) without a single shred of evidence toward that conclusion. Would you like to provide some more rationale for us?

(BTW, if you are using the word "mainstay" to define something that is "taught by default" around here, then you are completely misguided. There is no 'default' way of lucid dreaming that is taught here. Maybe the reason you get that impression is because DILD is taught more readily than WILDs. This, too, should tell you that it's simply the most common technique.)