I suppose that is one way of looking at it.
Printable View
I suppose that is one way of looking at it.
I read something in my philosophy book about the inadequacy of language to describe things like emotions, etc.. The argument was basically that although you can brand something as "anger" as one specific thing, everyone's experience of it is different and unique, and can't be explained. I think this is essentially what you're trying to say. Your title/point definitely was provocative as you said, but I guess it was a good choice to get your real idea across and show that people are getting too stuck around the word and the definition rather than their own experiences. A worthwhile read definitely.
http://i24.tinypic.com/n3m2l0.jpg
I guess the most important part of your article is the ending, at least for me.
We must 'forget' about chacing 'lucidity' (such an abstract, vague concept) and instead chace those unique feelings and sensations we've experienced which we tend to generalize and name it lucidity.
Nice write-up!
Well what we imagine when hearing the word lucidity is totaly subjective. And saying that chasing lucidity is wrong is not very precise. The fact is that the feelings you discribe are named lucidity. So when I say I chase lucidity I mean all the feelings there are. So I still don't understand the big deal about it :P .Quote:
Originally Posted by polmc
Ok, I didn't really read much of it because it was soooo long, and I only have a few more minutes online b4 I have to go, so I'll wait and read the rest of it before I make a proper response.
I readed your entire essay. This is brillant. I think you're right when saying to seeking for the feeling of awarness instead of seeking for an abstract concept. I feel that the details and examples you gives are right.
Me too, I guess this little additionnal piece of wisdom will help me induce a DILD tonight. Thanks!
While youīre busy trying to theorise about how Lucid Dreams canīt exist, I<ll go ahead and have one anywayz.
I think youīve become a little stuck in theorising so that you forgot that itīs simply not important for deciding wether Lucid Dreaming is real: If I have a Dream in which I suddenly realise that my surrounding enviroment and situation is all a dream, and from that moment on I gain enough consciousness to act/interact in that dream according to my own free will: Then I had a lucid dream. There are several levels of lucidity thatīs when youīve allready made it to the bottom of the "Lucid Scale".
Now you can bring all the scientific evidence in the world to persuade me to believe that what I just awoke from didnīt happen, but that just seems silly to me.
Seems just as silly as you looking at the Road, watching a bright Yellow, Green and Red van drive out of sight and then me telling you that that which you just saw wasn't there.
To the OP:
Your entire thesis is the equivalent of saying:
"Because there is no clear way to define 'consciousness,' consciousness does not exist."
"Because there is no clear way to define 'life,' life does not exist."
"Because there is no clear way to define 'awareness,' awareness does not exist."
These are all fallacious lines of thinking. Just because something is not clearly defined, does not mean it doesn't exist, in the general sense. It is a gray area, but it is a wide-scale of a single, existing, concept. Only a minimalist ideology would suggest that, since something cannot be pinpointed, it doesn't exist. It's much like saying "Since it can be scientifically argued that the Christian God does not exist, then A God (not matter what interpretation of God) does not exist." It's flat-out wrong.
If you want to tell it like it is, tell it like it is: Lucidity does exist - just like your waking-world consciousness exists, but there are varying degrees of it. It is not a static concept.
To say it 'doesn't exist,' just to showcase its subjectivity and wide-ranging nature, is nothing but rhetoric.
Hello all,
First of all thanks again for all the responses! On a topic like this I am very happy for the dialogue, which i believe helps fine-tune ideas, change them where necessary, and get to a better final theory. I wish I could answer all replies, but that would probably clutter up the thread far too much.
I also apologise to those who interpret my post in a certain way, and feel that it is inappropriate. It was not my intend to do so. In an effort to clarify:
I did, actually:Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneironaut
Quoted Redrivertears 10-02-2007:
Lots of response to the "Lucid Dreams don't exist" statement. I expected there would be :) You are ofcourse right. And I'm wrong. Lucid Dreams do exist. I deliberate made my statement provocative and extreme.
Still, I did it for a reason.
I never meant to imply that lucid dreams as such do not exist (and fortunately, it seems at least a part of the readers who made replies understood this). Rather my point was that we should try to look beyond the name towards the experience of the thing.
Especially for those of us who've not been fortunate enough to actually have a lucid dream, I imagine it must be difficult for them to really 'get' what the words are meant to symbolise. My advice to them is to try and imagine the feelings, the sensations of lucidity, and not get too hung up on all the talk about it. (Like for instance the hundred-and-one different VILD techniques we can find on these boards, which in matter of fact all refer back to the exact same thing).
Since I advocated the use of metaphores and analogies in an earlier reply, I'll give another one myself. Ask yourself, in the following examples, which one makes you want 'the bar of chocolate' more?
a) Tell yourself these words: "I want to have a bar of chocolate."
b) Imagine yourself sitting on a bench in a park, on a sunny day. it's not too warm nor too cold, and you have in your hand a recently bought bar of your favorite type of chocolate. Having all the time in the world you slowly unwrap the chocolate, savoring the smell of it, and run your fingers of its texture once. You bring it to your mouth and take a big bite, feeling the chocolate crumble first, then melt on your tongue. The sweet and rich taste fills your mouth, and you prepare for another bite.
Unless I'm wired very differently from anyone else, I think the second will get me us a lot closer to the experience of eating chocolate then the first will.
It's no different for lucid dreaming. The many theory's on lucidity are important and often necessary (not to mention highly constructive), but the one thing they do not do is actually impart the experience of it. Therefor they always have to be translated back to the experiental level, so we might better understand what they're all about.
I hope once more I've made things clearer this way,
Happy dreams!
-Redrivertears-
I apologize. I didn't see that part. :wink: I did understand your premise, but it was just the wording that I had a problem with. I didn't see that above statement until now, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redrivertears
you are ranking awareness dream and reality awareness on one scale of 1-100.. to counter everything you've said, i think dream awareness and reality awareness are two different things.
basically every dream i've ever had. either subliminally or superficially aware that i'm dreaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redrivertears
Very well put, i enjoyed the read.