Thread: Is lucid dreaming better than real life?

The sun is brighter on the otherside

Originally posted by Amethyst Star
My personal opinion, I'd rather have real life. In a dream there really is no outside stimulus to mix things up. Everything would be predictable and I enjoy a little spontaneity in my life. I have a pretty good imagination, but there are only so many things a person can come up with alone.

-Amé

Good point Ame.
It would be almost like eternal hell. If you think past the enitial illusion of the artificial or deceptive front. Without external NEW stimuli, one could only entertain themselves for a short duration when you really think about time and apply that to it.
Even with your imagination how long would it take you to satisfy all your fantasies?
Although I could probably spend a good 20 years trying to convince myself I am Lucid.

Just a thought. You could however possibly eliminate time in your lucid dreams and live other peoples lives. ----There are a lot of possibilities.
If it were like Vanilla sky (the Movie) I can't say I would have picked reality. But he was not aware it was an illusion while he was in the dream.

How did he finally come tothe conclusion it was not real? His own mind? And through his dream characters' clues?

Well, right now my life is so boring that i'd choose dreams but only if i didnt know it was a dream. Living in a lucid is just too lonely. i'd prefer being able to fly and the magic and all that stuff thinking it's real. whats so bad about it not being real anyway? what does it matter if its not real if ur happy?

Well i think the point is that life in a realm you knew to be false wouldn't be a happy one. But i guess, if you reckon you could be happy in falsity, permanent LD state could be awesome.

In relation to the philly, argumentative stream of this topic, i wanna throw in my support for the shared-dreaming-is-absurd side. (Yep, that's right; no supporting argument, no substantiation whatsoever, just the guiltless, effortless vomitting-up of opinion) I mean no offence, but in the name of honesty, i have to say i think SDing a laughable concept.

Although, i do stop laughing when i think about the nature of what basic neuroscience i've learnt. As a result of this learning, i do reckon shared dreaming is hypothetically feasible - but not of the disconnected sort you're discussing. I.e. i reckon one day we may be able to interconnect cerebral tissue and get neurons firing action potentials across brains. Interpersonal neuronal-chemistry communication! That would be awesome, and so lends theoretical plausibility to the idea of SD. But it remains that, in relation to the sort of SDing you guys are arguing over, i agree with Wicked in a big way.

[quote]

If you take our phyce and or conscious out of our perception of the laws of physics and general relitivity and apply it into the realm of quantum physics, anything may be possible.
Such laws are not quite so universal, but rather unknown. Much like our conscious.

You can do that to EVERYTHING. Does that mean that EVERYTHING is possible?

[quote]

If you take our phyce and or conscious out of our perception of the laws of physics and general relitivity and apply it into the realm of quantum physics, anything may be possible.
Such laws are not quite so universal, but rather unknown. Much like our conscious.

You can do that to EVERYTHING. Does that mean that EVERYTHING is possible?

Yes. Maybe not as we percieve things now, but yes.

I think i like ld'ing better than real life, 'cause in my dreams people are entitled to their own opinion and they don't argue.

Originally posted by Leo Volont
Perhaps the Dream Self does not discontinue dreaming because the Waking Self goes into gear. Perhaps the Dream Self continues uninterrupted, conscious of itself, but operating below the awareness of our Waking Consciousness which is preoccupied with concerns of the Waking World. It is like the Stars in the Sky. In the daytime they are still up there, but the brightness of the sun overwhelms and washes out the perceptablity of their Light.

I think that this is highly possible. Think about shooting stars...when we see one, we think of it as a miraculous event because we think that they are so rare. But in reality thousands of shooting stars are streaking across the sky all day and night long. But the light from the day...the light from the city...or as we might refer to as the Waking Conscious keeps us from being able to see them.

[quote][quote]

If you take our phyce and or conscious out of our perception of the laws of physics and general relitivity and apply it into the realm of quantum physics, anything may be possible.
Such laws are not quite so universal, but rather unknown. Much like our conscious.

You can do that to EVERYTHING. Does that mean that EVERYTHING is possible?

Yes.

OK, you are officially insane.

[quote][quote]

If you take our phyce and or conscious out of our perception of the laws of physics and general relitivity and apply it into the realm of quantum physics, anything may be possible.
Such laws are not quite so universal, but rather unknown. Much like our conscious.

You can do that to EVERYTHING. Does that mean that EVERYTHING is possible?

Yes.</span>

OK, you are officially insane.

If not limiting myself to any laws makes me officially insane then so be it.
<span style="color:green">I would rather be insane than blinded by all the lables and perceptions we have created. As Lucidnina said, "these things could still be there just becuase we can\'t see them."
And moreover when something is not understood it is generally something we as peolple are afraid of. again attaching a lable to something.
We are just beginning to scratch the service of quantum mechanics and physics. We can\'t even begin to imagine the possibilities.
So call me insane because I don\'t rule out possibilities. I\'d rather be insane an enrolled thankyou.

Wicked,

Man why are you so inclined in saying somethings impossible? I heard you say that to alot of things now, what makes you so sure of yourself?
Logically speaking anything is possible, given time. Occording to physics & simple observation of things we thought once impossible, now being possible, it seems obvious to me that you can't truely say something is impossible.

-Daniel

Originally posted by Wicked
OK, you are officially insane.

Aren't we all? In my mind none of us are truly sane (especially myself) unless we choose to think that way. My Russian lit teacher posed an interesting question: "Where is the mind located?" The mind is not found in a specific section of the body. So, since we can't say where our minds are, wouldn't that make us all mindless, ergo "insane".

Yeah for philosophy!

Anyway, I don't think everything is possible in dreams. It is limited by one's imagination, because obviously how can you do something if you can't imagine it, which leads me back to the main topic. How can you imagine something new if not by waking experiences with other conscious beings?

-Amé

[quote]


Wicked,

Man why are you so inclined in saying somethings impossible? I heard you say that to alot of things now, what makes you so sure of yourself?
Logically speaking anything is possible, given time. Occording to physics & simple observation of things we thought once impossible, now being possible, it seems obvious to me that you can't truely say something is impossible.

-Daniel




Thank You!

Because we do live in a world with strict physical natural laws that make certain things impossible. I'm not "limiting myself to labels" or some other shit, I'm merely limiting myself to logic, which is a GOOD thing in my perception. Prove to me that something I thought impossible is actually possible, and I'll nod, place it in the "possible" category and move on. Repeat for every other thing I thought was impossible. There's no even POINT to thinking everything is possible, since it's freakin' easy to prove that it is not, and otherwise you can't even DO anything about it. In other words, it's not "limiting" myself - the word limiting implies that there's something out there that i'm limiting myself of seeing or going to, which there is not. And as far as I know, quantum physics only apply on the molecular level and below, NOT on the macro level.

Wicked.
In my opinion there obviously needs to be logical thinking.
But the bar can never be raised if you can't ever imagine the (what we think of NOW), as a possibility.
Take a look at our past, Davinci for example. He had been put under house arrest for obsurd not possible, at the time, ideas. hydraulics, helicopters, etc. Before the Renaissance period if someone was to think outside the box they would be arrested. History is a good example. You can say all those ideas still followed the basic priciples and laws of physics, true. Now we are reaching an age where the quanta realm can be a factor. And we are fortunate enough to have support rather than suppression.
So those laws you speak of may not be as strict as you are taught to believe or conditioned to think.

Originally posted by Howetzer
Wicked.
But the bar can never be raised if you can't ever imagine the (what we think of NOW), as a possibility.Take a look at our past, Davinci for example. He had been put under house arrest for obsurd not possible, at the time, ideas. hydraulics, helicopters, etc. Before the Renaissance period if someone was to think outside the box they would be arrested. History is a good example. You can say all those ideas still followed the basic priciples and laws of physics, true. Now we are reaching an age where the quanta realm can be a factor. And we are fortunate enough to have support rather than suppression.
So those laws you speak of may not be as strict as you are taught to believe or conditioned to think.

Howetzer makes a good point. Wicked, I have a feeling that if every human thought like you the human race would never advance. You are so caught up with what you see around you, what you are conditioned to believe, what society and scientists tell us is possible or plausible that you cannot even comprehend the idea that there MAY just be something beyond what you think you can see or touch or feel. If someone had come to me 6 years ago and told me that I could live in my dreams, that I could control my dreams, and that they would be as real as my life right now I probably would have thought they were crazy. Lucid dreaming is a great example of something that is proven possible where others might completely disbelief that it can exist...like astral projection, like obes...etc.etc.etc.

Now for a moment step down from your "prove this to me or I will not believe it" narrow-mindedness and take a look at the world around you. You DO realize that what you are seeing is only our mere interpretations of the world around us? Time? Doesn't exist...the past doesn't exist...the chair you are sitting on doesn't exist in the sense that you know it. The world is actually made up of "non stuff" rather than anything really physical or tangeable. It's all energy. There is so much still that our minds cannnot even understand...so why then do you think that NOTHING is possible unless proven possible? Maybe your mind cannot quite grasp this concept just yet...

Originally posted by lucidnina
You DO realize that what you are seeing is only our mere interpretations of the world around us? Time? Doesn't exist...the past doesn't exist...the chair you are sitting on doesn't exist in the sense that you know it. The world is actually made up of \"non stuff\" rather than anything really physical or tangeable. It's all energy. There is so much still that our minds cannnot even understand...so why then do you think that NOTHING is possible unless proven possible?

In what sense does the chair exist then? I think the most relevant sense (to me, and us anyway) in which the chair i'm sitting on exists is in the sense that i know it. Any other sense (in which i don't know i), i naturally don't know. Thus, it's not knowledge, and therefore ought to be considered second-rate evidence. Maybe you're right: it might not actually be what i see the chair as, but does it make any sense to go with what it could be, over what we see it to be? Surely not. Surely it is most sensible to take what we have, what we see, feel, hear first, and only after that consider anything that hypothetically may or may not be the case. I find it uncomfortable to look at the world as if blind, yet it seems some of you live constantly in this discomfort of supposed human-deception. Why bother?

I'm happy to think about the possibility that our sensory perception of the world might not be showing us all there is, but i'm not a big fan of living too strictly by that doubt. I think it makes most sense to go by what we have.

On another note, when we have discussions such as this, i think we are talking about what is possible in our world, and in our time, whether that hypothetically could be limiting or not.

Sure, in the spectrum of infinite time and space, it's always arguable that 'anything can happen', but why're we concerning ourselves with infinity in this post? Aren't we discussing whether or not SDs can occur today, in our lives (in our specific time and space) - not others, within the infinite range of eternity? As such, we should again go by what we have here and now - our sensory world. If in it, there's no room for the concept of shared dreaming, there's no reason to believe in it. Sure, this is no disproof of it, but it is as much sense as we can hope to make of it. Supposing its possibility, with the defense that everything is a possibility, - i grant - is a reason not to disprove it entirely. But it's far from any reason to believe in it.

Thoughts?

I'd put both really. Lucid Dreaming is the ultimate fun and freedom, but the Waking World has everyone ya know in it. Ya can't replace your friends with dream characters, so I could never choose between Lucid or Life. (Just wanted to say that )

As tempting as it sounds to simply go to sleep and dream of my paradise for eternity, I would choose life. I have obligations to fulfill, people to meet, lives to enrich or consternate. Perhaps if my life were different or I knew there would be no physical/mental/social consequense for spending a lifetime..... nah, still gotto go with life.

Seems like the thread was ressurected, so why the hell not.

I am not limiting my mind in any way, nor do I presume that the laws of physics as we currently understand them represent the absolute pinnacle of universal understanding or something. I'm also fully aware that the universe we are observing is nothing more than electric impulses brought to our heads by various sensors placed in different parts of our bodies. Hell, for all we know we could be in a Matrix, or brains in a jar (Splipsism, such an old argument...)

But why should I automatically lean toward assuming that everything is possible, while all my experience tells me that it's not true? We don't know anything for sure, but from what we DO know there ARE strict, hard and absolute limits to the way in which this world works. Why should I abandon that line of thought, proven by countless scientific, philosophical, personal experiments, for a mere... "well, it could kinda be that maybe everything is possible, and I pulled it out of my ass". Would it make me any better to believe in something that all man-kind's experience screams that it's a blatant lie? Maybe I'm wrong, but until the I'm proven so, I see absolutely no reason to believe that there are no limits to this world.

Name ONE practical advantage that such a belief gives you over belief in natural rules and restrictions. Pretty popular catch phrases like "thinking outside the box" don't count (and this term is useful only for technical terms anyway, nobody ever gained anything by "thinking outside the box" in the field of philosophy).

As a conclusion: I'm not bound by anything, nor do I limit myself to anything. I DO start from the neutral assumption that "anything is possible", but as more parts of the equation add-up, my position moves towards "these things are possible, while these other things are not". If, and only if this model of thought is disproved will I fall back to the original "everything is possible" line of thought until new equations start outlining a new set of rules, otherwise I see absolutely no reason, nor gain in thinking in that way.

Life for sure, as I haven't had any decent lucids yet

The first couple of days it would be pretty fun but after some years you will just think it's normal and even worse... You won't have any real 'connections' or conversations whatsoever, I'm betting it's kinda lonely :/

PS: OMG, this is necroposting. If only I had checked the date :p

Why isn't there a "both" option... each has ups and downs, I would never choice one over the other...

Of course it's better than life. The catch is, though, that life is a steady and long reality, where lucid dreaming is noncontinuous, short lived, and hard to achieve. It's better, so we have to work for it.