Thread: why it's not worth believing in claims of prophetic/precog dreams

Originally Posted by adrift

i don't think YAD's argument was trying to convince anyone here that precognitive dreams exist. He was trying to make the point that is it unfair to ridicule someone for producing evidence from their own subjective experiences. You can be open and still not believe in something, but what you've done here is tried to attack the claims of someone else.

Just as people here have presented their subjective experiences as evidence for precognitive dreaming, you have presented your own opinions as evidence against it. You're trying to fight someone with the same tools.

ahah. you use words like "ridicule" and "attack". indeed I just gave critical observations - attack would imply using bad words or simply calling them silly. And there is a big difference between those.

is it unfair to ridicule someone for producing evidence from their own subjective experiences.

ridicule yes. critisize no. subjective experiences are not evidence.
DOLHENTY ARCHIVE: Objective Experiences and Subjective Experiences

And while I have no problem with people believing whatever they want, which they are free to do, I will unapologeticaly criticize and "ridicule" - if that is what it appears like to you, for trying to convince me (the original poster) that their experiences are "evidence" and "scientific". And even more if they say stuff like "it is beyond our understanding so you must take my word for it" - in that case I'll pull no punches.

You're trying to fight someone with the same tools.

Critical thinking VS subjective experience = NOT the same tools

but what you've done here is tried to attack the claims of someone else.

and what do you think is wrong with "attacking" claims of someone else? If a claim cannot stand up under scrutiny it SHOULD be challenged until there is good evidence that it is true or until the claim goes away.

Originally Posted by yuriythebest

ahah. you use words like "ridicule" and "attack". indeed I just gave critical observations - attack would imply using bad words or simply calling them silly. And there is a big difference between those.

And while I have no problem with people believing whatever they want, which they are free to do, I will unapologeticaly criticize and "ridicule" - if that is what it appears like to you, for trying to convince me (the original poster) that their experiences are "evidence" and "scientific". And even more if they say stuff like "it is beyond our understanding so you must take my word for it" - in that case I'll pull no punches.

[...]

Critical thinking VS subjective experience = NOT the same tools

but you're not critically thinking, you're only stating that precognitive dreaming isn't possible because there isn't enough scientific evidence for it. it would also be true that there isn't scientific evidence disproving it either. if you want to take this on the stance of scientific evidence, you can't do either.. because attempts at researching precognitive dreaming are shut down.

and i do think your OP is an attack. there was another thread already made concerning precognitive dreaming and you already stated your opinion on the matter, but you went further to make another thread to continue your disapproval. that's rather uncalled for.

going back on the idea of scientific evidence, i think it's rather insulting to others that you only rely on scientific research when you handle new ideas. no one, except you, is trying to prove anything by bringing up a discussion of precognitive dreaming. furthermore, your reliance on specific methods of research is limiting and is only one point of view.

i agree with you about standing up to false claims. but noone here can prove/disprove precognitive dreaming. attacking others and supporting your own point of view with weak arguments is not getting us closer to the truth.

you're only stating that precognitive dreaming isn't possible because there isn't enough scientific evidence for it.

ahh, and here you're putting words in my mouth. I never stated that "precog dreaming is impossible" - I said it's not worth believing it at this point due to lack of good evidence

it would also be true that there isn't scientific evidence disproving it either. if you want to take this on the stance of scientific evidence, you can't do either.. because attempts at researching precognitive dreaming are shut down.

as above. Also, since I'm not the one trying to prove/disprove anything, the burden of proof falls on those who claim that precog dreaming is possible, not on me.

and i do think your OP is an attack. there was another thread already made concerning precognitive dreaming and you already stated your opinion on the matter, but you went further to make another thread to continue your disapproval. that's rather uncalled for.

why?

going back on the idea of scientific evidence, i think it's rather insulting to others that you only rely on scientific research when you handle new ideas. no one, except you, is trying to prove anything by bringing up a discussion of precognitive dreaming. furthermore, your reliance on specific methods of research is limiting and is only one point of view.

the Scientific method is the best way of gaining knowledge and deciding whether something is true/false. While not infallible, it's way better than personal anecdotes, personal accounts, and arguments from authority.

i agree with you about standing up to false claims. but noone here can prove/disprove precognitive dreaming. attacking others and supporting your own point of view with weak arguments is not getting us closer to the truth.

as above. I'm not trying to "disprove" anything, rather to say it's not worth believing in precog dreaming (at this point in time). If in 10 years it's "proven" sure - then I'll believe

I've contributed what I can to the debate. There are peer-reviewed journals in favor of precognition, some links are in the thread. Google for it if needed. Mutual dreaming occurs and has been noted in dream journal entries. the problem is the subjective argument and hard problem of consciousness such as qualia which Science currently cannot answer.

Until we can record a dream and compare this vivid data to future events, other dreams etc... we will never know for certain due to the paradox of subjectivity. The rest is just your opinions and arguments which don't really amount to much.

Originally Posted by YAD

Until we can record a dream and compare this vivid data to future events, other dreams etc... we will never know for certain due to the paradox of subjectivity. The rest is just your opinions and arguments which don't really amount to much.

and that we can agree on

Originally Posted by yuriythebest

and that we can agree on

Great, I'm not one to try to sell the idea but I like to prove a point. Check out my James Randi thread particularly the last few entries.

Precognitive Dream Research - JREF Forum

Originally Posted by YAD

Great, I'm not one to try to sell the idea but I like to prove a point. Check out my James Randi thread particularly the last few entries.

Precognitive Dream Research - JREF Forum

yeah tried I to register there but they said I couldn't cause they said "I was a spammer" hmm...
Any chance you can PM the mods and tell em I'm NOT a spammer?