Shared Dreaming Club

[Mylynes]

This is a group of shared dreamers united under common goals. The ultimate goals may never be achievable and yet, why not reach for the heavens? This list may change, the goals are simply off the top of my head for now. Goals: 1. To make progress on working out the bugs with shared dreaming. Specifically: 2. To be able to have shared dreams at will. 3. To be able to target individuals. So far success has personally only been random and not targeted. 4. To general expand on what is possible with shared dreaming. Ultimate Goals: 1. Mass shared dreaming. To be able to cause the entire world's population (or as many as possible) to experience the same dream. 2. To be able to influence people through dreams. In particular to access and add/remove/edit people's memories. Inception. 3. To dilate time in other peoples dreams. Imagine the possibilities. If someone were to grow skilled enough to cause mass numbers of people to all experience extremely long, potentially mind-warping nightmares. You could kidnap minds and basically they would be mere playtoys in the hand of a god for as long as the god wished to play with them. No judge or jury could ever find you guilty of anything. You could convince the extremely rich to give you money simply to avoid having more nightmares. You could change the way the mass public views dreams in general. You could make the government very nervous lol. I could go on and on about the possibilities. They could be used for great evil, or great good. Humans could potentially evolve. They could exist in a shared dream plane as gods and live for as long as they desire. What would you do with such an ability if you were to succeed in reaching these ultimate goals? The point of this thread is not to debate whether such things are possible. They may not be. The point is to attempt to make progress towards these goals anyways, and to discuss what these abilities could or should be used for if ever attained. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

[Chimpertainment]

delusions of grandeur...It is important to realize that ocean of consciousness we live inside has as much influence on us as we have on it. In theory, you would have to unite a massive group of people in order to effect another large group of people. Only one person might be able to project a powerful signal so to speak, but it would probably only have great reach instead of great influence.

[Sageous]

So I read the "goals" section in the OP and said, "Okay, cool; all those are definitely things that would need attending in shared-dreaming. Then I read the "ultimate goals" and said, "Okay, #1 sounds good, but why on earth would I want to remove or edit people's memories? It isn't just that that has nothing to do with dreaming, (just as Inception has nothing to do with dreaming at all), it's that I'm not seeing that kind of intrusion into a person's basic sense of existence and identity as a good thing, by any measure... I certainly wouldn't want it done to me. Still, I said, there might be a positive reason for doing this. But then I read the next paragraph, and just said, "Wow." So let me get this straight: you achieve all of these lofty goals, learn to wield a genuine force for communication, and your best examples of success are to cruelly terrify millions of people, extort money, and make governments nervous? Nice. I hope that, if mass-dream sharing is possible, that there is a failsafe of sorts built into the collective unconscious to prevent such egregious actions. I also hope that others who post here can think of things to do with this power that don't involve hurting others. As you briefly mentioned, this kind of universal communication could be a real force for good; it would have been nice if you included something decent or at least unharmful in your "imagine the possibilities" section. Yes, we could evolve through this stuff, and become gods of our dreamworlds; but do we really want to be such nasty, oppressive gods, forever? I hope not. Fantasies are fun; I'm all for them. But fantasies about hurting other people tend to bite you in the ass somewhere along the way -- you might be careful about what you wish for...

[Baron Samedi]

I'd like to bring the sea of humanity into a beautifully possible Utopian dreamworld of peace and harmony.

[shadowofwind]

I hope that, if mass-dream sharing is possible, that there is a failsafe of sorts built into the collective unconscious to prevent such egregious actions. I think there is a fail safe which limits such actions, though without totally eliminating them, and that can be seen in the world we live in now. Examples of mass shared dreams include apocalyptic visions and visions of religious icons. I also think a lot of more mundane dreams such as of being frozen while trying to run, dreams of falling, and dreams of sex also have a shared component on a fairly large scale, though this may be less obvious. Part of the 'fail safe' is that people reflexively try to isolate themselves psychically, and try to avoid experiences they perceive to be unhealthy. Another part of the fail safe is the way that people who are particularly good at things like shared dreaming tend to undermine themselves with drug abuse or messianic delusions. I think that for now this is as it has to be. We can make steps, and might even accomplish something like getting dream phenomena some scientific recognition. But we're not going to radically transform the way our world works, and overly arrogant efforts in that direction are likely to go Jim Jones on us (Jim Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), in one way or another. On the side of how shared dreams help....I think that when we make progress with our own personal growth issues in relation to our dreams, that helps other people who have similar dreams and issues because of our inter-connection with them. I've been able to interpret other people's epic dreams because of connections with my own dreams, though whether that actually helps people I can't say.

[Sageous]

^^ Interesting. Aside from making feel a bit old for asking myself, "Why on earth would he need to include a link to explain his Jim Jones reference?" your point about the built-in fail-safe got me thinking. Could this be a natural thing? In other words, this isolation -- or choosing a sure-fire "blocker" like addiction -- is not a conscious event, but a reflex to elevated conscious activity that is encoded in our DNA, hard-wired into our genetic memory? It's always been intriguing to me how our foundational nature seems to be regularly at odds with our intellect, and here is another case. It could be the case that we are all capable of shared-dreaming, and that we're doing it all the time (whether awake or asleep). But perhaps we're not ready -- not yet mentally or spiritually mature enough -- to handle or endure being a member of a groupmind while still retaining our identity. Or, perhaps, we are ready, and our physical programming (DNA) is doing everything it can to prevent our minds from transcending physical priorities (not actively, of course; DNA is not sentient). So our brains automatically redirect ethereal communication with other minds into, say, rationalization buffers that instantly translate the event into something that is referentially not dream-sharing. This way our minds don't get confused or, worse (from a natural standpoint), collectively elevated to a plateau of experience that doesn't include and interest in our physical forms at all, much less interest in making more physical forms (thus keeping DNA relevant). This to me makes the goal of successful dream-sharing -- or, rather successfully recognizing the dream-sharing we've all been doing for generations -- that much more valuable. Harnessing the comprehension of a groupmind while still retaining our identity may result in that elusive "next step" in the evolution of consciousness, and might allow us finally to break the tight leash that nature has currently bound to our fleshy necks. But that next step must happen without a need for revenge on the old condition. In other words, as long as we see dream-sharing as a source for power, immortality, or oppression, we are holding ourselves to our current fleshy (naturally coded) standards, and that hold will prevent the necessary uptick in consciousness... perhaps this too is a hardwired natural event? All that said, I'm with WakingNomad on an ultimate goal for this stuff: dream-sharing may be just the tool, perhaps that only tool, that might finally enable a world of harmony, self-awareness, and peace among all our disparate and selfishly (if not willfully) closeted minds. That seems a much better route than brutal world dominance or some sort of revenge over the lesser minds currently in power.

[shadowofwind]

Could this be a natural thing? In other words, this isolation -- or choosing a sure-fire "blocker" like addiction -- is not a conscious event, but a reflex to elevated conscious activity that is encoded in our DNA, hard-wired into our genetic memory? Though there's more than one way to describe it, I don't think there's anything very mysterious about how this works. As you become more psychically alive, the pleasures of abusing it become more compelling, and the difficulty of bearing it without finding some means of suppressing it become stronger. You're helpless to avoid self-destructive behavior beyond the point where it overpowers your strength of emotional character. All of us live at such points, which seems apparent to me if you look at our bad habits and what motivates them. I don't think these failures can be 'fixed' by subscribing to the right philosophy or course of discipline, even though a philosophy or practice can help us grow in the right direction. Harnessing the comprehension of a groupmind while still retaining our identity may result in that elusive "next step" in the evolution of consciousness, and might allow us finally to break the tight leash that nature has currently bound to our fleshy necks. This comes back to the argument about whether there's something wrong, unpleasant, or unnecessarily limiting about nature that can be transcended by freeing ourselves from it. Though this is partially a semantic issue, my view is that there is not, that nature is a necessary expression of who we are, and that to view it as an escapable prison amounts to a hope for self-avoidance.

[Mylynes]

delusions of grandeur...It is important to realize that ocean of consciousness we live inside has as much influence on us as we have on it. In theory, you would have to unite a massive group of people in order to effect another large group of people. Only one person might be able to project a powerful signal so to speak, but it would probably only have great reach instead of great influence. Would it still be considered a delusion if it actually happens? Would a man who is paranoid about people watching him still be considered paranoid if he really is being watched/followed/spied on?

[tP97]

Imagine a world where the two worlds meet with the use of technology , this has potential to truly revolutionize our world ... It would be like an internet we would be able to 'live in' , people would set security systems to prevent psychic intrusions , there would social networking realms where people would be able to SD together . There would be restricted realms where people have no control . The possibilities are almost infinite. Well I have completed one of the goals , I have been SDying with a close friend from past many days , so I can SD with people I want to at will (to some extent).

[shadowofwind]

Would it still be considered a delusion if it actually happens? Would a man who is paranoid about people watching him still be considered paranoid if he really is being watched/followed/spied on? The delusional part isn't the belief in psychic power, its the glamorous interpretation of the abuse of power. At best you would be a psychic peeping tom, at worst a member of a gang of thugs. Its a grandoise distortion of one's true place in the scheme of things to regard other people as if they're cattle. (And wrong to treat cattle that way also.) I don't think you should take this criticism personally though, its something that everyone has to wrestle with.

[shadowofwind]

Imagine a world where the two worlds meet with the use of technology , this has potential to truly revolutionize our world ... It would be like an internet we would be able to 'live in' , people would set security systems to prevent psychic intrusions , there would social networking realms where people would be able to SD together . There would be restricted realms where people have no control . The possibilities are almost infinite. I think its worth bearing in mind that psychism has been around for a long time. Like drugs, some members of every generation act as if they're the first to discover it, while mostly ignoring the lessons of previous generations. It was for instance much bigger in the 19th century than it is now. Having been on the internet since 1990, I think its an apt comparison in some ways though. Like radio, broadcast TV, and cable TV, it started off with an idealistic vision of information sharing, but is rapidly being turned into an Orwellian, advertizing laden cesspool. Though it remains a remarkable medium, people are too ignorant to recognize what they've done. And its still early, it will get much worse.

[Sageous]

^^ Ever the ray of sunshine, Shadowofwind! Trouble is, you're right again...but there must be a positive spin to it, somewhere. right?

[shadowofwind]

^^ Ever the ray of sunshine, Shadowofwind! Trouble is, you're right again...but there must be a positive spin to it, somewhere. right? I think your argument against Law of Attraction applies here. You have a positive, optimistic understanding of the value and role of work. The challenge is to find a way to talk about "smoke this, become instantly rich" schemes without being a naysayer. I realize this is a talent I mostly lack. I do have a lighthearted, optimistic side, but I don't show it much. The underlying assumptions its rooted in are different enough from what most people assume that it almost invariably comes across as something else. I go for ponderously critical because at least people understand me then. But yeah, its a problem, I'll try to do better.

[StephL]

This is a group of shared dreamers united under common goals. The ultimate goals may never be achievable and yet, why not reach for the heavens? This list may change, the goals are simply off the top of my head for now. Goals: 1. To make progress on working out the bugs with shared dreaming. Specifically: 2. To be able to have shared dreams at will. 3. To be able to target individuals. So far success has personally only been random and not targeted. 4. To general expand on what is possible with shared dreaming. Ultimate Goals: 1. Mass shared dreaming. To be able to cause the entire world's population (or as many as possible) to experience the same dream. 2. To be able to influence people through dreams. In particular to access and add/remove/edit people's memories. Inception. 3. To dilate time in other peoples dreams. Imagine the possibilities. If someone were to grow skilled enough to cause mass numbers of people to all experience extremely long, potentially mind-warping nightmares. You could kidnap minds and basically they would be mere playtoys in the hand of a god for as long as the god wished to play with them. No judge or jury could ever find you guilty of anything. You could convince the extremely rich to give you money simply to avoid having more nightmares. You could change the way the mass public views dreams in general. You could make the government very nervous lol. I could go on and on about the possibilities. They could be used for great evil, or great good. Humans could potentially evolve. They could exist in a shared dream plane as gods and live for as long as they desire. What would you do with such an ability if you were to succeed in reaching these ultimate goals? The point of this thread is not to debate whether such things are possible. They may not be. The point is to attempt to make progress towards these goals anyways, and to discuss what these abilities could or should be used for if ever attained. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Ha - now this is interesting! I do not know you - so - I hypothesise what this thread could mean, looked at from my point of view. What you say - in my eyes is: Lets not discuss if it is possible - lets run the thought-experiment, as if it was, and run it through to it´s partly predictable outcomes and further scenarios. Doing away with all the virtuous efforts - why discuss these - right down into it. So - and I do very much see a point in doing this. But not to advance it - but to try and shine a light on what exactly one is also subscribing to, if one decides to believe in shared dreaming. This topic of abuse is not often brought up. Like western Buddhist gurus not wanting to talk about free will so much - some of the followers might rather follow something else, if they knew too much of the "details" - that not said on firm ground - just came across a lively debate on it. Anyway - it might be good, to have people realise consciously and in detail, what it is exactly, that they believe in. And of course - if you make a thought-experiment - run a worst case or at least fubar scenario - by all means. And creativity in this thread might blossom nicely. But I am not entirely sure, where you are heading with it, Mylynes! What is your answer on could and should and will be possible in your lifetime and by you? delusions of grandeur...It is important to realize that ocean of consciousness we live inside has as much influence on us as we have on it. In theory, you would have to unite a massive group of people in order to effect another large group of people. Only one person might be able to project a powerful signal so to speak, but it would probably only have great reach instead of great influence. If I do the thought-experiment - the conclusion that adepts of the art would ultimately be extremely powerful is hardly ignorable - that is deeply entwined with the "basic background concepts" of shared dreaming in my view. Communication is influence. And to speculate on the borders of this hypothesised power - I see it as underestimating the principle. But - just to make it clear - I do not believe something like this without technology is possible - I just like thought-experiments. So I read the "goals" section in the OP and said, "Okay, cool; all those are definitely things that would need attending in shared-dreaming. Then I read the "ultimate goals" and said, "Okay, #1 sounds good, but why on earth would I want to remove or edit people's memories? It isn't just that that has nothing to do with dreaming, (just as Inception has nothing to do with dreaming at all), it's that I'm not seeing that kind of intrusion into a person's basic sense of existence and identity as a good thing, by any measure... I certainly wouldn't want it done to me. Still, I said, there might be a positive reason for doing this. You are assuming, people had only moral or at least innocently hedonistic motives, when they used this hypothetical shared dreaming? Surely not - there are already people claiming to share dreams - and I hope none of them thinks they are beyond any baser human instincts and at least little "viciousnesses" at times, too. He did not say, it was a good thing, by the way. A good thing might be to erase the specific traumatic memory leading to horrible suffering from post traumatic stress syndrome, btw.. After proposing to for now accept the reality of the concept - he then states his innocent seeming goals 7 goals. But then I read the next paragraph, and just said, "Wow." So let me get this straight: you achieve all of these lofty goals, learn to wield a genuine force for communication, and your best examples of success are to cruelly terrify millions of people, extort money, and make governments nervous? Nice. The scenarios of the paragraph are not the goals he states but very good examples in my view - to get people shaken up a bit - especially the chronic optimists - all good with a positive general outlook - but not on reflex. In his own 4 goals he proposes: "4. To general expand on what is possible with shared dreaming." There is no more extra need to go into nasty details, of what could be done with it - that would have been enough, actually - to trigger such a scenario automatically. See the links below - technological examples usually bring up very basic fears immediately. I hope that, if mass-dream sharing is possible, that there is a failsafe of sorts built into the collective unconscious to prevent such egregious actions. I also hope that others who post here can think of things to do with this power that don't involve hurting others. Well - how would there? The old thing - the best battlements and defences and watches on a fort will not avoid that somebody opens the door willingly - and humans can be influenced - in such a scenario - if you could open your door - you would then also be vulnerable to skilled intrusion. There never is 100% safety in anything, actually. My argument again - if it were so - methods to deal with the whole scenario would have evolved culturally and maybe biologically. Science fiction time and again ponders, how a not shieldable total telepathy, or a partial one, etc... - would maybe effect human or form alien societies. Usually changes/differs very profoundly.. As you briefly mentioned, this kind of universal communication could be a real force for good; it would have been nice if you included something decent or at least unharmful in your "imagine the possibilities" section. Yes, we could evolve through this stuff, and become gods of our dreamworlds; but do we really want to be such nasty, oppressive gods, forever? I hope not. Maybe not you and maybe nobody forever - but - but all of us have motivations and desires and disorders. Children might be very dangerous - if they "got their will" in such a way, before having developed their inner compass and stand more or less solidly concerning responsibility. Children are often cruel and they are great at learning.. Not as answer to you - the latter - just thinking about missing evidence for such. Fantasies are fun; I'm all for them. But fantasies about hurting other people tend to bite you in the ass somewhere along the way -- you might be careful about what you wish for... How do you mean? Mylynes himself did not propose the stuff in the paragraph you referred to. But he did propose the principle of shared dreaming - under full acknowledgement of the possible implications. How can one do away with the chance of these implications being correct - can you propose sd, without accepting all that might spring from it? Even and esp. if you know, you are only guessing there? Why not stretch the mind and really imagine the possibilities! Uh - but that would be directly on topic - later maybe.. And see how you like the idea that every night when you go to sleep - you are more or less helplessly - and un-knowingly under the influence of other humans. And then maybe even more entities. Would you really feel safe going to sleep? This sounds like a horror-movie. But I guess practically - most personal experiences are of a distinctly dreamy feeling anyway - and you somehow not really, really believe this sort of stuff. Hence the seemingly irrational fearlessness. Speaking generally here. If I knew it was so - with evidence and demonstrable, repeatable feats, and own conviction - I would not like that!! I want it like it is - my own private God-dom - only me as director - nobody to think of/care for/fight off for real. Got enough of reality when I am awake. The dream is a personal thing - only mine - I am convinced of and content with it. I'd like to bring the sea of humanity into a beautifully possible Utopian dreamworld of peace and harmony. The sea of humanity - I like this expression - not all of humanity would follow you along, and why should you care. Nice - almost too nice.. I think there is a fail safe which limits such actions, though without totally eliminating them, and that can be seen in the world we live in now. Examples of mass shared dreams include apocalyptic visions and visions of religious icons. I also think a lot of more mundane dreams such as of being frozen while trying to run, dreams of falling, and dreams of sex also have a shared component on a fairly large scale, though this may be less obvious. Part of the 'fail safe' is that people reflexively try to isolate themselves psychically, and try to avoid experiences they perceive to be unhealthy. Another part of the fail safe is the way that people who are particularly good at things like shared dreaming tend to undermine themselves with drug abuse or messianic delusions. I think that for now this is as it has to be. We can make steps, and might even accomplish something like getting dream phenomena some scientific recognition. But we're not going to radically transform the way our world works, and overly arrogant efforts in that direction are likely to go Jim Jones on us (Jim Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), in one way or another. On the side of how shared dreams help....I think that when we make progress with our own personal growth issues in relation to our dreams, that helps other people who have similar dreams and issues because of our inter-connection with them. I've been able to interpret other people's epic dreams because of connections with my own dreams, though whether that actually helps people I can't say. You probably know, where I don´t agree .. But I fully agree, that something like shared dreaming does take place in the case of mass (or only one person) hypnotisations - the people ultimately hypnotising themselves into experiences, which were in some way wanted/expected and of meaning - possibly masterfully directed by someone, and technically assisted "miracles" and visions. But that is not one person reaching in an unknown way into the very brain and it´s contents of a dreamer - and just so, no tools - not with measuring or watching something - like the guys playing a computer game over the internet with an EEG on the head - and even one can move the other´s finger. From anywhere. But not over an internet of the souls it is - but through light and sound, electricity, feel.. These people are awake - or at least in direct physical interaction with each other. One can be hypnotised through the TV, even. What about this theory, that you have to want to and sort of actively follow a hypnosis by the way? What you wrote on helping other people and helping them analyse their dreams sounds great - but I do not see the connection to sharing. Interestingly - with my first boyfriend - we interpreted our dreams - most of them - and it was niice - and insightful also. Now with my DJ - and of course esp. the private parts - I find I can analyse them quite nicely myself - at least to a degree! Not a fan of psycho-analysis in it´s classic form - but privately - yes - very good. ^^ Interesting. Aside from making feel a bit old for asking myself, "Why on earth would he need to include a link to explain his Jim Jones reference?" your point about the built-in fail-safe got me thinking. Could this be a natural thing? In other words, this isolation -- or choosing a sure-fire "blocker" like addiction -- is not a conscious event, but a reflex to elevated conscious activity that is encoded in our DNA, hard-wired into our genetic memory? It's always been intriguing to me how our foundational nature seems to be regularly at odds with our intellect, and here is another case. It could be the case that we are all capable of shared-dreaming, and that we're doing it all the time (whether awake or asleep). But perhaps we're not ready -- not yet mentally or spiritually mature enough -- to handle or endure being a member of a groupmind while still retaining our identity. Or, perhaps, we are ready, and our physical programming (DNA) is doing everything it can to prevent our minds from transcending physical priorities (not actively, of course; DNA is not sentient). So our brains automatically redirect ethereal communication with other minds into, say, rationalization buffers that instantly translate the event into something that is referentially not dream-sharing. This way our minds don't get confused or, worse (from a natural standpoint), collectively elevated to a plateau of experience that doesn't include and interest in our physical forms at all, much less interest in making more physical forms (thus keeping DNA relevant). This to me makes the goal of successful dream-sharing -- or, rather successfully recognizing the dream-sharing we've all been doing for generations -- that much more valuable. Harnessing the comprehension of a groupmind while still retaining our identity may result in that elusive "next step" in the evolution of consciousness, and might allow us finally to break the tight leash that nature has currently bound to our fleshy necks. But that next step must happen without a need for revenge on the old condition. In other words, as long as we see dream-sharing as a source for power, immortality, or oppression, we are holding ourselves to our current fleshy (naturally coded) standards, and that hold will prevent the necessary uptick in consciousness... perhaps this too is a hardwired natural event? All that said, I'm with WakingNomad on an ultimate goal for this stuff: dream-sharing may be just the tool, perhaps that only tool, that might finally enable a world of harmony, self-awareness, and peace among all our disparate and selfishly (if not willfully) closeted minds. That seems a much better route than brutal world dominance or some sort of revenge over the lesser minds currently in power. You will know, where I´m coming from, now Sageous.. This is an interesting construct - DNA hard-wired mechanisms to shroud away from us the transcendental abilities our spirits possess. Hypothetically speaking of you - I do know this as well. I rather think the opposite, though - I think a belief in the spiritual, and in life after death is rather encouraged by our brains. On the basis of there being no basis to these beliefs - reports are sparse and real proof absent - but the human brain "decides to believe" anyway. Science has for example confirmed, that we rather remember the good things in life much clearer better and longer - "memory paints in rosy colours". Not to get depressions, is one hypothesis - same with the beliefs - a hardwired drive to believe in any sort of beyond. Not to go kill yourself in true hardship. Or at least many human brains do "decide to believe" - very many. Wishful thinking in my eyes. Though there's more than one way to describe it, I don't think there's anything very mysterious about how this works. As you become more psychically alive, the pleasures of abusing it become more compelling, and the difficulty of bearing it without finding some means of suppressing it become stronger. You're helpless to avoid self-destructive behavior beyond the point where it overpowers your strength of emotional character. All of us live at such points, which seems apparent to me if you look at our bad habits and what motivates them. I don't think these failures can be 'fixed' by subscribing to the right philosophy or course of discipline, even though a philosophy or practice can help us grow in the right direction. This comes back to the argument about whether there's something wrong, unpleasant, or unnecessarily limiting about nature that can be transcended by freeing ourselves from it. Though this is partially a semantic issue, my view is that there is not, that nature is a necessary expression of who we are, and that to view it as an escapable prison amounts to a hope for self-avoidance. The first fattened part - do you speak from experience? What I call my free will is a malleable thing - I know well - like most or all, I suppose - the phenomena of bad-habit generation and up-keeping and having to fight sometimes to overcome something - or at least put mental work into changing it. Of there being mechanisms, even, sort of. Why these would suddenly not be in action in one´s personality any more, once the skill of - here advanced shared dreaming - is reached? They would still be at work, I guess. This sounds like having experienced the ethical conundrums with magic first hand, shadowofwind - are you saying this? Would it still be considered a delusion if it actually happens? Would a man who is paranoid about people watching him still be considered paranoid if he really is being watched/followed/spied on? Of course he would not be considered delusional any more. In some rare and sad cases, something like this happens. There was a famous case in Germany - where a husband accused his wife of really big style fraud and financial crimes in a big bank, she worked in - and political connections and several people - not sure of the details any more. Seems he acted as if "mad" a bit on top of not stopping to try to convince everybody - the authorities - that he was right. But he had to be sued out of hospital by lawyers - and it took a while - she was found out. Of course he is not being considered delusional any more - but in this case - he had to fight for it. Imagine a world where the two worlds meet with the use of technology , this has potential to truly revolutionize our world ... It would be like an internet we would be able to 'live in' , people would set security systems to prevent psychic intrusions , there would social networking realms where people would be able to SD together . There would be restricted realms where people have no control . The possibilities are almost infinite. Well I have completed one of the goals , I have been SDying with a close friend from past many days , so I can SD with people I want to at will (to some extent). Look - this is already in it´s beginnings - with technology - as you say. At least with technology - of a standard imaginable in the near future - you would know, you are in the process of entering the mental realm of another person - and vice versa. Think "The Cell" - cool movie, I find. These links will surely interest many of you: Scientists Discover How Brains Keep Clean Hackers Backdoor the Human Brain - Successfully Extract Sensitive Data Brain Researches Can Detect Who We Are Thinking About (SciAm) Hooooooooly shit. New Interface Allows Humans to Move a Rat Uhm..Guys.....GUYS...... Researcher controls colleague’s motions in 1st human brain-to-brain interface | UW Today And - there most instantly have the suspicion, that such technology can be abused, or don´t you think? Back to the OP - not a bad idea to drive the topic into extreme seeming reaches - just look into yourself and tell me, you are not thinking about what could maybe follow such as the above technology. And - only because it works with electronics - that makes it not per se more sinister - if you think about it rationally. This supposed shared dreaming would enable much, much more violations of privacy and right out malignancy to gain a profit of whichever sort over people to their harm. So - believe in shared dreaming, if you wish - but if you do this in itself logically and with rationality - you will end up with the question the OP asks: (The point is to attempt to make progress towards these goals anyways,) and to discuss what these abilities could or should be used for if ever attained. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Aaand Mylynes? How do you reckon your chances at reaching a goal like: "2. To be able to influence people through dreams. In particular to access and add/remove/edit people's memories." within your lifetime for you personally? And would you - and to what ends? By the way - I have not seen Inception, and might miss out on context there. Sorry guys and gals - got carried away a bit - not all "answers" directed at the quote by the way - and - well.

[Baron Samedi]

I say, I do care about humanity as a whole, and the living things on the planet, which is why I'd like to do a shared dream with the whole planet of a possible utopia.

[shadowofwind]

StephL: A theme running through most of what you said is that people choose to believe in shared dreaming, or not, depending on whether they like the idea of it. This isn't where some of us are coming from though. We believe in it because, like it or not, its an undeniably real part of our personal experience. So the question becomes what to do about it. Whether to believe in it is no longer a question. If the reality of shared dreaming were a question for us, however, the way we would approach it would be to try to determine whether or not its real, not whether its something we like. This is the scientific approach. Because if its real, it might not stop being real just because we choose to deny it. So we want to know what it is, and isn't, so we can deal with it. Sobriety over delusion. And see how you like the idea that every night when you go to sleep - you are more or less helplessly - and un-knowingly under the influence of other humans. And then maybe even more entities. Would you really feel safe going to sleep? This sounds like a horror-movie. Yes, that's pretty much the situation, but its not that clear cut. You are exposed to some extent, but you have a notable degree of safety also. As you are in other ways in waking life. Yes, much of life is like a horror movie. We're relatively insulated in the west, but a lot of people are faced with a starker reality whether they like it or not. But I guess practically - most personal experiences are of a distinctly dreamy feeling anyway - and you somehow not really, really believe this sort of stuff. Hence the seemingly irrational fearlessness. Speaking generally here. No, it is real to me, more real in some ways than my waking life experience, which is real too but not so close to my most vulnerable part, so to speak. My irrational fearlessness is because I know I can't hide anyway: fate could squash me like a bug if it wants to. If I knew it was so - with evidence and demonstrable, repeatable feats, and own conviction - I would not like that!! I want it like it is - my own private God-dom - only me as director - nobody to think of/care for/fight off for real. OK. Though at some point there's not much point in debating it then. If you want to know, you can gain evidence by pursuing the experience. Once you've thought about it enough to have some idea whether or not you want to do that, everything else is vain speculation. Got enough of reality when I am awake. The dream is a personal thing - only mine - I am convinced of and content with it. OK. I think you came to this forum for some reason though, that you're looking for something. This supposed shared dreaming would enable much, much more violations of privacy and right out malignancy to gain a profit of whichever sort over people to their harm. Yes, all kinds of potential for abuse, which is why I'm such a moralizing spoil sport. But the shared dreaming is really hard to control, so its not as dangerous as a naive thought of it might seem to imply. So - believe in shared dreaming, if you wish Again, its a matter of personally attainable evidence and honesty, not faith. - but if you do this in itself logically and with rationality - you will end up with the question the OP asks: Yes we care a lot about those questions, which is why several people immediately jumped on it. What you wrote on helping other people and helping them analyse their dreams sounds great - but I do not see the connection to sharing. Recent example: Two nights ago I had two dreams. The following day I went to a dream site and read two dreams, titled "need advice" and "need help interpreting", and they were the same two dreams I had. So then when attempting to understand the other person's dream I can think about how it feels a little easier because I dreamed it too. Of course its a bit different when I dream it, since I'm not the other person. And this isn't the first-person-shooter-video-game type lucid shared dreaming that some other people are talking about. But there is a shared element. Like I said, I don't know whether this is actually helpful to anyone or not. Sometimes I wonder if my relatively unique dreaming 'ability' is as useless as my relatively unique ability to make fart noises by squeezing my palms together. Moreover I control the fart noises, whereas for me the dreaming is largely involuntary, I'm more a witness than a perpetrator. But its not "random coincidences" either. Maybe I'd buy that the first, second or third time, but not when it happens a couple times a week for several years, and when the dreams often contain objectively verifiable info about people I haven't met. The first fattened part - do you speak from experience? Sort of. It stems more from observing how the psychically strongest people I've encountered turn out to be, after a few years of observation, remarkably messed up. Furthermore their doctrines are invariably twisted in subtle but perverse ways. To me this is a nightmare, discovering that all the paths seem to lead to this. So I try to understand it, so I can avoid the pitfall. Yes I see it for myself too, but I've been fortunate enough to witness it in preceding generations first, so hopefully I've been spared the worst of it. We're all stuck on something of course, and the critical, analytical nature that has spared me of some of these other troubles comes with its own drawbacks. Why these would suddenly not be in action in one´s personality any more, once the skill of - here advanced shared dreaming - is reached? They would still be at work, I guess. We were alluding to earlier conversations, and to eastern mystical teachings that try to separate the 'self' from the body. Yes you're correct that shared dreaming doesn't do that. What I said there was too much out of context to make much sense of. This sounds like having experienced the ethical conundrums with magic first hand, shadowofwind - are you saying this? Again, more of a spectator than a perpetrator. But yeah, I'm aware that what goes on in my private thoughts does have at least some minor effect on other people, and I've had some rather horrifying dream experiences to drive this home. This is true for everyone as I see it, whether they're aware of it or not. We don't 'get away' with anything, and we do real harm to other people as well as good. Its just part of life, just like with parenting where no matter how hard you try you can't raise your children perfectly, and it does affect them. You just have to accept it, its in the nature of being in real contact with other people. Its not all black and white though. How you affect other people has an awful lot to do with them too, so its not something to get too uptight about.

[Sageous]

Steph: I think you and I may have read two different OP's here... What I read in the OP was not a cautionary tale, and that when Mylynes imagined the possibilities, he was not doing a thought experiment to show what bad stuff could happen, but truly suggesting it would be cool to be able to suffer this newfound power on unsuspecting victims (please correct me if I'm wrong, Mylynes). I may have gotten a bit preachy in my first post, but it was due to the impression I got from the OP that his Shared Dreaming Club is planning to cultivate and excercise a new power over others -- and preferably others who can do nothing about that power. I did not see it as a warning, but as a wish. Perhaps I misunderstood. If Mylynes confirms that I did (he hasn't yet, and you'd think he would have by now) misunderstand, than all apologies!

[shadowofwind]

In fairness to Mylynes, he suggest a discussion on how shared dreaming should be used, and welcomed our thoughts. This isn't to disagree with you Sageous, I'm just trying to highlight the positive, as any ray of sunshine should! [By the way Sageous, we could try a shared dream if you want. It seems it happens more easily for me than it did a couple of years ago. If its the privacy that worries you, I'm not really doing it anyway, I'm just along for the ride.]

[Sageous]

In fairness to Mylynes, he suggest a discussion on how shared dreaming should be used, and welcomed our thoughts. This isn't to disagree with you Sageous, I'm just trying to highlight the positive, as any ray of sunshine should! I consider myself illuminated! Yes, I understood that; perhaps I was overreacting to tne tone of the OP. The direction the thread did take was most interesting, though...

[EbbTide000]

I say, I do care about humanity as a whole, and the living things on the planet, which is why I'd like to do a shared dream with the whole planet of a possible utopia. Ok [u]Lake of Fire[u] When I got my full enlightenment experience in 1981 I was subtlety merged with everything (but by the time I noticed the merge it was only a 2 mile sphere and slowly shrinking). But for about 5 weeks after, I was aware of the suble embarrassment of feeling (knowing) that everyone else who was fully enlightened knew everything about me too. Each time I tuned into my enlightened state I would try to shrink out of it because I was so o o o embarrassed of all the bad, mean, etc., things I had ever done because there was no hiding from them or covering them up. Eeeeevvveryyyy thing is totally transparent in full enlightenment. They (the other residents of total enlightenment) were not judging or disliking me for all my sins. I could feel there gentle laughter at my discomfort at being known sooo intimately. I once looked at big rocks (at the side of the road) and understood why folks would pray to the rocks and the mountains to hide them from he who sat on the throne: Rev:6:16 King James Bible And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: There was no wrath. It was far worse than that because it wasn't an outside God judging me and sentencing me to eternal Hellfire. It was me trying to be totally enlightened (knowing everything about everything) but trying to hide my self. Because in this wonderful totally enlightened state, I, am totally known Yikes !!!!!!!! ...... Wow I just realised why I didn't stay fully enlightened. Wow... I needed to escape the knowing that I was totally known. Well anyway That's the rub When mass psi dreaming happens in the future, folk won't be taking advantage cos with it comes the strong knowledge that one is also totally transparent (fully known) and All the sins are excruciatingly embarrassing. And it is like Rev:6; 16 You are in the lake-of-fire cos you are trying to hide all you embarrassing stuff (sins) but you cannot. Lyrics I dreamed that the great judgment morning Had dawned, and the trumpet had blown; I dreamed that the nations had gathered To judgment before the white throne; From the throne came a bright, shining angel, And he stood on the land and the sea, And he swore with his hand raised to Heaven, That time was no longer to be. Refrain: And, oh, what a weeping and wailing, As the lost were told of their fate; They cried for the rocks and the mountains, Rev6:16 They prayed, but their prayer was too late. The rich man was there, but his money Had melted and vanished away; A pauper he stood in the judgment, His debts were too heavy to pay; The great man was there, but his greatness, When death came, was left far behind! The angel that opened the records, Not a trace of his greatness could find. *** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egTH...e_gdata_player ***(2:58) 14,543 views

[shadowofwind]

Havago, Thanks for sharing, that sounds like a fantastic experience. And timely to mention too, since we were just talking about the fear of being completely exposed. Definitely that kind of hiding is a big part of what makes shared dreaming hard for most people, in my view. And its a human problem in general, because it limits our hearts' transformation, though I think that limitation is necessary for us also. The phrase 'full enlightenment' seems to imply that nothing whatsoever that is knowable was left outside your awareness. I don't believe that, and I think that the assumption of completeness generally leads to some very bad results. The worst kind of self-righteousness looks like humility without the knowledge of what is not included. But I'm trying to be more of a ray of sunshine, and its a valuable and wonderful thing you have described, so I'll leave it at that. We're all a little better off from you having experienced that I think.

[Chimpertainment]

Would it still be considered a delusion if it actually happens? Would a man who is paranoid about people watching him still be considered paranoid if he really is being watched/followed/spied on? Of course you are implying that it can actually happen and this person really is being watched. There is the possibility that it could happen or that people are watching this person; however it is a matter of observable reality, not implied possibilities that one must work upon to construct a healthy worldview. If you choose implied realities, you will waste a great deal of time and energy chasing shadows. On the other hand, if there is demonstrable evidence that could be presented that shows some kind of causal relationship, then you have something. These fantasies that you are indulging are mere shadows of your ego. You have fear, therefore you seek control. The glory and bliss which one might feel when all power is in their hands is an illusion. One can never have enough power or control because fear bases intentions cannot experience unification. And in that unified love is where you will find your peace, not this veracious, pillaging, ravenous beast of fear.

[Sivason]

Possibility: Singles clubs for sex. Goal: Prevent teen pregnancy. They could pick good looking avatars and sex each other up in the dream realm, no disease, no babies.

[shadowofwind]

Possibility: Singles clubs for sex. Goal: Prevent teen pregnancy. They could pick good looking avatars and sex each other up in the dream realm, no disease, no babies. Doesn't help in my view, because it cultivates the sexual craving without more than temporarily satisfying it. Eventually it is no longer satisfied with dream sex and spills out into the 'real' world, stronger than ever, in one way or another. Sex wants to produce babies, and if it gets stymied for long enough it becomes disease or finds a way around the barrier. Of course sex wants to produce way, way more babies than we can actually support without war or famine, but such is the nature of our human affliction. I don't think the problem has a short term solution. Can't hurt too much to try your idea though, and that's shared dreaming a lot of people could pull off. Gets messy though. I don't know the history behind this site's ban on talking about sex, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's a good reason for it. There was some sick power stuff going on here a few years ago from what I gather from the after echos. Whether I'm right or your right, a massive experiment is currently underway with internet porn. I think it amounts to pretty much the same thing as dream sex, even though people don't experience it that way because they're not lucid with it in the same way that they are in dream.

[StephL]

Steph: I think you and I may have read two different OP's here... What I read in the OP was not a cautionary tale, and that when Mylynes imagined the possibilities, he was not doing a thought experiment to show what bad stuff could happen, but truly suggesting it would be cool to be able to suffer this newfound power on unsuspecting victims (please correct me if I'm wrong, Mylynes). I may have gotten a bit preachy in my first post, but it was due to the impression I got from the OP that his Shared Dreaming Club is planning to cultivate and excercise a new power over others -- and preferably others who can do nothing about that power. I did not see it as a warning, but as a wish. Perhaps I misunderstood. If Mylynes confirms that I did (he hasn't yet, and you'd think he would have by now) misunderstand, than all apologies! Yes - "we did read a different OP" - I was spinning it around, by trying to make my point - namely that if sd were possible - then exactly these things would happen, simply because there always will be some very nasty persons in the power to use it, too. Since I do not know Mylynes - this was relatively easy to read it "my way". And no - I also don´t know what Mylynes has in this mind for this thread - I did ask this myself. But while putting my interpretation glasses on - I could not avoid seeing clearly, that the scenarios he brought after his goal-list, were not advertised as goals in any way - rather put in front of the question - if it worked - what is possible and "what could or should" be done and what not. But it did not escape my notice, how the whole OP was set - I know what I did was a steph-spin. And so also parts of my answers in between quote-parts of yours and others - were also generally directed. But really - I think, once you go about his advanced goal number 4 - you are already then full on in horror-movie-land. What I want to slip in, because one could get the impression here maybe: It is not "I do not want to believe, because a horror scenario would logically follow." It is: "I see no reason whatsoever to believe in it." Under the principle I generally go about: as long as there is not any valid and convincing evidence - independently done under real study conditions, repeatable, controlled against fraud and self-delusion and statistically validated...lala. Which I do not expect at all - there seems to be no sort of substrate and way of information transfer available for such a phenomenon. StephL: A theme running through most of what you said is that people choose to believe in shared dreaming, or not, depending on whether they like the idea of it. This isn't where some of us are coming from though. We believe in it because, like it or not, its an undeniably real part of our personal experience. So the question becomes what to do about it. Whether to believe in it is no longer a question. If the reality of shared dreaming were a question for us, however, the way we would approach it would be to try to determine whether or not its real, not whether its something we like. This is the scientific approach. Because if its real, it might not stop being real just because we choose to deny it. So we want to know what it is, and isn't, so we can deal with it. Sobriety over delusion. I really assume, that most people really honestly only want to believe - and very many say so time and again. And - as far as I can find it - personal experiences reported are very vague and easily open to psychological effects - like with sd to construct meeting places in both minds and form them out and also the relationship and planned interaction. So there is massive synchronisation going on in real life - and only difficult interpretative manoeuvres, how to see such an experience as valid - since it so fiendishly seems to evade closer inspection and examination. It looks like the huge body of experiences can be chalked up to concerted self-suggestion leading then with this so powerful instrument of LD to the impression, that is must be real, because it looks, feels, sounds - maybe even more than real. What you describe is on a different page - you seem to be almost haunted by psychic phenomena..? No, it is real to me, more real in some ways than my waking life experience, which is real too but not so close to my most vulnerable part, so to speak. My irrational fearlessness is because I know I can't hide anyway: fate could squash me like a bug if it wants to. Yes, all kinds of potential for abuse, which is why I'm such a moralizing spoil sport. But the shared dreaming is really hard to control, so its not as dangerous as a naive thought of it might seem to imply. Good that you see it so - because - if I were to take the view on myself - as said - what follows is total helplessness and being dependent on good-will or disinterest of other entities, who can potentially exert devastating effects on me, while I am dreaming. So - that is - stoicism in the face of the undeniable - but theoretically you are maybe even the first person to follow my logic there. That is much more rational in my eyes than the "Ah - but I am an immortal soul - And why would anybody want me harm anyway? - There are helpers! - But I always win my swordfights!" answers, which can be found galore. OK. I think you came to this forum for some reason though, that you're looking for something. Yes I did - to learn LDing really well and enjoy and learn from your and my experiences - get inspiration, food for thought - all sorts of things, but I am not a person searching for her true nature or the reason, I am here, or for techniques to do the paranormal things, some are claiming to be able to do on here. I am not looking for more "content" than what is of this world, but for communication and thought-exchange directly here on the forum - about anything, actually. And I also like thought-experiments and lively discussions. Recent example: Two nights ago I had two dreams. The following day I went to a dream site and read two dreams, titled "need advice" and "need help interpreting", and they were the same two dreams I had. So then when attempting to understand the other person's dream I can think about how it feels a little easier because I dreamed it too. Of course its a bit different when I dream it, since I'm not the other person. And this isn't the first-person-shooter-video-game type lucid shared dreaming that some other people are talking about. But there is a shared element. Like I said, I don't know whether this is actually helpful to anyone or not. Sometimes I wonder if my relatively unique dreaming 'ability' is as useless as my relatively unique ability to make fart noises by squeezing my palms together. Moreover I control the fart noises, whereas for me the dreaming is largely involuntary, I'm more a witness than a perpetrator. But its not "random coincidences" either. Maybe I'd buy that the first, second or third time, but not when it happens a couple times a week for several years, and when the dreams often contain objectively verifiable info about people I haven't met. So - this is how it happens to you? You dream something - and afterwards, you find out, that there is a relevance to what other people have dreamt the same night. Do you have to dream at the same time, for this to work? Are you lucid in these? And - do you know, when you have had such a dream - so that you then go onto a forum - already knowing, there will be somebody, in whom´s dream you were - don´t know - looking into, or taking part? Can you discern these from purely your own dreams? Did you only look into these two threads only/directly or were you searching over several dreams to find the fitting ones? Does this really happen several times a week for years? How can you decide, that it was the same dream you had - when there were differences? One thing, that comes to my mind, is - and you mentioned such before - that their are common dream patterns, which many many people experience - good example with your not being able to move/run away from something. How do you know it is more than you having a dream with a certain pattern, like it shows up regularly in all our dreams? And you also some understanding as to the meaning after long and thorough self-analysis of your dreams, when there comes up a certain "archetype" - so you can give good counsel, then? Sort of. It stems more from observing how the psychically strongest people I've encountered turn out to be, after a few years of observation, remarkably messed up. Furthermore their doctrines are invariably twisted in subtle but perverse ways. To me this is a nightmare, discovering that all the paths seem to lead to this. So I try to understand it, so I can avoid the pitfall. Yes I see it for myself too, but I've been fortunate enough to witness it in preceding generations first, so hopefully I've been spared the worst of it. We're all stuck on something of course, and the critical, analytical nature that has spared me of some of these other troubles comes with its own drawbacks. Ah - okay. So I can not directly ask you yourself. But thinking about human nature combined with the pre-set hypothetical scenario would lead to persons with much power be vulnerable to their own shortcomings. But so much as to take every single one of them down, as a sort of failsafe against super-sorcerers - hm. Again, more of a spectator than a perpetrator. But yeah, I'm aware that what goes on in my private thoughts does have at least some minor effect on other people, and I've had some rather horrifying dream experiences to drive this home. This is true for everyone as I see it, whether they're aware of it or not. We don't 'get away' with anything, and we do real harm to other people as well as good. Its just part of life, just like with parenting where no matter how hard you try you can't raise your children perfectly, and it does affect them. You just have to accept it, its in the nature of being in real contact with other people. Its not all black and white though. How you affect other people has an awful lot to do with them too, so its not something to get too uptight about. Okay - you have your experiences and as you describe them - and for you they are too many and too fitting and too real-feeling, so they are not questionable as to "natural causes" behind them to you. I doubt that personally - but - how can I know? - I don´t. But I find it refreshing, that you do indeed think it through to the bitter and nasty aspects of this hypothetical (for me..) scenario.