Thread: What Every Lucid Dreamer Should Know About Sleep Paralysis

Originally Posted by moonshine

I have to agree with RB.
Thors thesis is that it can't be "paralysis" of you can move. This is a rather constrained semantic argument. Almost a word game.

I don't see any reason why your body can't be in sleep paralysis when you're not moving, and can come out of sleep paralysis when you decide you consciously want to move. After all sleep paralysis is designed to occur when you are asleep not wake. When your body/brain twigs your actually awake, the right thing for it to do would be to shut SP down no?

It's not a word game. Atonia is produced by mechanisms in the pons and medulla oblongata that gate the motor neural signals from the cortex. So how would these mechanisms distinguish between signals generated by dreamed versus non-dreamed motor behavior in the cortex? In other words, if atonia was turned on in wakefulness as you are assuming, then why would it be turned off just because you wanted it to? And how could it happen instantly the very moment you decide to move?

When people find themselves in sleep paralysis (the real thing), they are not able to come out of it instantly, despite desperately wanting to. Otherwise sleep paralysis could not have been detected, and hence would not have been a disorder.

Originally Posted by Thor

It's not a word game. Atonia is produced by mechanisms in the pons and medulla oblongata that gate the motor neural signals from the cortex. So how would these mechanisms distinguish between signals generated by dreamed versus non-dreamed motor behavior in the cortex? In other words, if atonia was turned on in wakefulness as you are assuming, then why would it be turned off just because you wanted it to? And how could it happen instantly the very moment you decide to move?

When people find themselves in sleep paralysis (the real thing), they are not able to come out of it instantly, despite desperately wanting to. Otherwise sleep paralysis could not have been detected, and hence would not have been a disorder.

I'm really not sure what your getting at, as you appear to be condradicting points you have already accepted.

REM attonia can and does occour outside of Rem Sleep. Hence "Sleep Paralysis". The disorder Sleep paralysis is very scary for people, but generally only lasts a minute or so. And they do break out of it. It just seems like a long time. But this is a disorder. It seems to me that it takes longer to break out of because of the state of mind. Whats to say that it can't be easier for a non-distressed mind hmmm? And who's to say its a on/off switch. Might it not be a progressive thing?

By the way, why shouldn't it turn off just because you want it too. Doesn't that just mean its doing its job as its supposed to?

I do however agree with one point, in that some may mistake partial sleep paralysis (which you do not accept) for full sleep paralysis. It is then up to others to advise them accordingly. But simply dismissing their very real physiological experiences isn't very helpful. Not saying this is you, but its something I've seen time and time again on threads.

Originally Posted by Thor

It is abundantly clear from the discussion on pages 108-109 that he's talking about sleep paralysis as a disorder, and how you can turn it into an advantage by initiating WILDs from it. I already covered this in my article.

Of He's talking about Sleep Paralysis (whether its the disorder or not). This isn't a surprise. You asked for the evidence that SP is a legitimate way of inducing a WILD. This chapter clearly shows that it is.

Are we not just going over old ground here?

Originally Posted by Thor

No, the burden of proof is always on the person making the positive claim. Thus, if you say that people who do not suffer from sleep paralysis may be able to induce atonia in wakefulness, it is up to you to provide the evidence to support this.

I'd simply refer you to the same chapter. Which describes the induction of Sleep Paralysis whilst conscious (Sleep Paralysis being REM atonia in wakefulness). You are therefore the one contradicting the evidence.

Its certainly not an on/off switch with which you can consciously will SP to happen. But then no one has ever claimed as much.