Thread: Why I am not Trying to Prove Shared Dreaming

Proof is no more than demonstrating the complience with a grammar system.
Evidence is providing an environment.
In neither one of these can anyone controll anothers ability to comply with principles of grammar or abstract from an environmental source.

One can put a math book in front of a tree, but it will not learn to read.

If telepathy exists, and I am sure it does, no amount of words or standing in front of someone will make them telepathic enough to understand.

It is not these unique things that are of importance to someone who can never participate in the experience. A man can live among the apes, but an ape cannot live among men.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Proof is no more than demonstrating the complience with a grammar system.
Evidence is providing an environment.
In neither one of these can anyone controll anothers ability to comply with principles of grammar or abstract from an environmental source.

One can put a math book in front of a tree, but it will not learn to read.

If telepathy exists, and I am sure it does, no amount of words or standing in front of someone will make them telepathic enough to understand.

It is not these unique things that are of importance to someone who can never participate in the experience. A man can live among the apes, but an ape cannot live among men.

I kinda get your point, in sum proof works for people that don't know and want to learn, if they are skeptic it's a big loss of time feeding their ego by debating with them. You choose to believe whatever you want to. Some people will help others to experiment what shared dreaming is but prooving it to someone, ughh it doesn't help people that share dreams at all, it just wastes their time.

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

.You choose to believe whatever you want to. .

A great fallacy--that we can choose what to believe, is the same as saying we can digest what we have not eaten by choice.

Cause and effect. We cannot choose what to believe--it is not a choice. This phrase is only used to excuse our delusions. Perception determines conception, conception determines will.

Freedom of belief is not a freedom at all, it is a corrupter of freedom.

When you believe that belief itself is something open to choice, you validate the imposition of belief--you validate the complete violation of the human mind and soul.

When, and only when you understand truth, you understand that it is independent of gods and men alike.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

A great fallacy--that we can choose what to believe, is the same as saying we can digest what we have not eaten by choice.

Cause and effect. We cannot choose what to believe--it is not a choice. This phrase is only used to excuse our delusions. Perception determines conception, conception determines will.

Freedom of belief is not a freedom at all, it is a corrupter of freedom.

When you believe that belief itself is something open to choice, you validate the imposition of belief--you validate the complete violation of the human mind and soul.

When, and only when you understand truth, you understand that it is independent of gods and men alike.

sure bro you can believe whatever you want, and let's keep on topic. PD: To the message under mine, anything that you think or conceptualize is a belief to proove what you're experimenting, saying I think and I believe that ... is about the same.

I read there were experiments to impregnate what people were thinking into a screen. They had a person conected to some wires and they asked if he could think of the leter X and then the image that was displayed on the screen resembled something like a X. Maybe when this evolves it could be used to test shared dreaming.

Kiss my ass. Tell someone else how and what to respond to. Arrogant sob.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Kiss my ass. Tell someone else how and what to respond to. Arrogant sob.

Okay I looked at my post after a day, and yes I was arrogant and an ass in that post, I'm sorry.

What I wanted to express is that anything that anyone thinks or conceptualize is a belief or something that someone chose to believe, true or false at a given moment. For example someone has a grapefruit and passes it to a kid saying, this is a grapefruit , kid: Is this really a grapefruit?. Concepts are things that can be doubted because you don't know if the word someone told you really is related to the "idea" that concept represents, everything they teach you could be all a lie.

The foundation of language: Names are conventional. We do not name the abstraction, because that can never be conventional, we name the source, i.e. reality common to all.

But no, no one in all of creation can give you confidence in reality--that is a psychological function--which again, is not conventional.

When you say Is a grapefuit really a grapefuit, you are only using the same name twice. Aristotle, Plato, and those who work with mental functioning-- is or is not is all we can do, if you cannot do this, it is a mental dysfunction. Plato said you were mentally asleep. Aristotle said you were a veggie. Scripture notes that you are, by definition, dead--what we call brain dead.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

The foundation of language: Names are conventional. We do not name the abstraction, because that can never be conventional, we name the source, i.e. reality common to all.

But no, no one in all of creation can give you confidence in reality--that is a psychological function--which again, is not conventional.

When you say Is a grapefuit really a grapefuit, you are only using the same name twice. Aristotle, Plato, and those who work with mental functioning-- is or is not is all we can do, if you cannot do this, it is a mental dysfunction. Plato said you were mentally asleep. Aristotle said you were a veggie. Scripture notes that you are, by definition, dead--what we call brain dead.

About "Is" i like this: E-Prime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

The foundation of language: Names are conventional. We do not name the abstraction, because that can never be conventional, we name the source, i.e. reality common to all.

But no, no one in all of creation can give you confidence in reality--that is a psychological function--which again, is not conventional.

When you say Is a grapefuit really a grapefuit, you are only using the same name twice. Aristotle, Plato, and those who work with mental functioning-- is or is not is all we can do, if you cannot do this, it is a mental dysfunction. Plato said you were mentally asleep. Aristotle said you were a veggie. Scripture notes that you are, by definition, dead--what we call brain dead.

You got me wrong sir, what I meant is when someone doesn't know what an orange is (for example) , you can show him an apple and say ¡¡this is an orange!! you choose to believe what they're telling you is true or false.

I don't like your attitude sir, not because you're just making sense gives you the right to insult and be disrespectfull, you're going into my ignore list, I have no reason to talk to someone who's just gonna insult me.

I think thinking you have to prove something to someone is mostly motivated out of ego.

Although I have had people come up to me who had no idea what lucid dreaming was and they told me I came into their dream and told them they were dreaming and they became lucid for the first time. Along with bunch of other confirmed shared dreams with friends. But really I don't want to have to prove anything to anyone. I don't want to have to be anything for anyone. I want to escape that. I want to be pure. I want to fight for my purity.

Originally Posted by saltyseedog

I think thinking you have to prove something to someone is mostly motivated out of ego.

Although I have had people come up to me who had no idea what lucid dreaming was and they told me I came into their dream and told them they were dreaming and they became lucid for the first time.

That's cool man. How many times did this happen?

once

Well I do have a friend that told me I was in her first lucid dream and that my DC acted like a more experienced dreamer than she was but that may just have been a DC made of her expectations of me. I am the one who introduced her to lucid dreaming so in a dream she might think of me as a dreamer more than as whatever she thinks of me in waking life.


Another thing. Once I was trying to contact Waking Nomad as I was falling asleep and all I could see as I tried contacting him was a Character from a TV show. The character was a vampire that was the leader of vampires in Dallas. I told Nomad about that and he told me that he had been going around as a vampire cowboy.
It may be coincidence that I saw a vampire from an area known for cowboys when he was a cowboy vampire or it may have been my first experience with the lowest levels of shared dreaming.

Originally Posted by Waterknight

Well I do have a friend that told me I was in her first lucid dream and that my DC acted like a more experienced dreamer than she was but that may just have been a DC made of her expectations of me. I am the one who introduced her to lucid dreaming so in a dream she might think of me as a dreamer more than as whatever she thinks of me in waking life.


Another thing. Once I was trying to contact Waking Nomad as I was falling asleep and all I could see as I tried contacting him was a Character from a TV show. The character was a vampire that was the leader of vampires in Dallas. I told Nomad about that and he told me that he had been going around as a vampire cowboy.
It may be coincidence that I saw a vampire from an area known for cowboys when he was a cowboy vampire or it may have been my first experience with the lowest levels of shared dreaming.

I actually dressed like a vampire cowboy for a full moon pow wow on a mountain.

bump because people keep trying to get me to prove dis shit

lol. Well I can't prove it 9and I am still a tiny bit skeptical) but I have had one confirmed shared dream. It was non lucid for both me and the other dreamer but it was the same.

I know this is an old thread so sorry to bump it, but I just wanted to say that this stuff IS real. It has taken me three years to get a confirmed shared dream, but now I do it every week - and the reason why it has taken me so long? Because I was holding myself back, kept wanting MORE proof and each time I met another person in a dream I didn't trust my gut. Skepticism is good, but in the dreaming it only creates more barriers. Sometimes you just have to let yourself go completely and believe.

We will be starting a new framework within the IOSDP very soon and will be pairing people up - this time I am convinced we will have strong results from the get go - as long as those involved are committed. (http://www.dreamviews.com/internatio...aming-project/)

A revolution IS coming