First: I am not seeking to discredit shared dreaming experiences. I have never done this; if anything, my post history has provided them considerable credence in the past.

Please do not suppose you know my personal worldview and philosophy. I can assure you: you don't.

All of that is beside the point I am trying to make.

Second: Among other things, a useful conceptual system still requires adherence to the definition of accepted terms. Below I will provide an analysis on what terms* and ideas we seem to agree on thus far, and then I shall note the discrepancies so they might be discussed further.

*terms are notarized with double quotation marks.

1. "real" and "imaginary" are non-distinct terms which exist as modifiers that can describe the set of all "experiences"

By agreeing these terms are non-distinct, and considering their inherent meaning, it can be concluded that these terms are less useful/descriptive than other common modifiers. For example, saying "I thoroughly enjoyed the red wedding" has more value than stating "I thoroughly enjoyed that imaginary wedding".

2. "sleep" and "wakefulness" are terms (separate from "real" and "imaginary") that exist as states within the set of all "experiences".

Thus "sleep" and "wakefulness" are simply a specific kind of "experience".



Where we don't seem to agree:

1. I postulate "sleep" and "wakefulness" are distinct terms, as clear symptoms and methodology can be utilized to distinguish the two.

Though I will not go into further detail (for reasons of time), this postulate can be reasonably shown given a framework which includes a place for the scientific method.

Even if this were not the case (please note, paragraph 1 of post #484 implies that we are indeed working with such a framework), your own philosophy of nature--as you put it--places the burden of proving that "sleep" and "wakefulness" are non-distinct on you. Thus I'd be off the hook here, regardless. And you wouldn't be able to meaningfully dispute this postulation without first proving me wrong or yourself a hypocrite, which would either bring this conversation to a screeching halt or send it into loops.

2. Shared dreaming can be succinctly defined: mutual "experience(s)" between two or more individuals during "sleep".

Please notice the definition I present is extraordinarily distinct from 'mutual experiences between imaginary persons in dream reality'. In my definition, I purposefully do not use the non-distinct terms "real" and "imaginary" as they are largely irrelevant to begin with (we have already agreed on this). Additionally, I do not use the word 'dream' in my definition, as that is simply poor description.

If we can agree that dreams be defined as 'experiences which occur during "sleep"' (and I do not think this unreasonable) then the origin of my definition becomes strikingly clear and relevant. If not, I would ask that you provide your own definition of both "dreams" and "shared dreaming" so we might reach a consensus and move this discussion along in a more coherent manner.