Thread: A recurring DC in my dreams which doesn't behave like any other DC's

I suppose the most rational explanation is that Yuya is a figment of Hiyu's imagination. That having been said I do not find it impossible that she is something more. I have been kicking around a few ideas while reading this.

To me, the distinction between one sentient being and another here begins to grow a little vague. Why couldn't there be another conscious personality in existence in one's subconscious? What natural law would that violate? But then, what reason would we have for thinking that way as opposed to thinking of Yuya as simply another personality of the OP's which only manifests itself in the dreamworld?

I don't know. It's all very interesting. Personally I like the idea of Oneironauts discovering another intelligent race, but I'm afraid my theories to that end are mostly wishful thinking.

P.S. I know I spelled Hyu's name wrong, but I am using someone else's IPad, and haven't figured out how to go back to change it.

Originally Posted by cedward1

I suppose the most rational common explanation is that Yuya is a figment of Hiyu's imagination.

Rationality has no place in this thread. Just say it is the most common or widely-accepted explanation.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

Rationality has no place in this thread. Just say it is the most common or widely-accepted explanation.

Well, perhaps "simplest" would be a better word. Though not impossible, some other force or entity would require a much more complex explanation.

I don't know that I would agree that rationality has no place in this thread. But it seems to me we've been through this before, and I think it is all a disagreement over definitions.

Originally Posted by cedward1

Well, perhaps "simplest" would be a better word. Though not impossible, some other force or entity would require a much more complex explanation.

I don't know that I would agree that rationality has no place in this thread. But it seems to me we've been through this before, and I think it is all a disagreement over definitions.

I agree with you; it would be better classified as the simplest definition. Also, I feel that Atkins has already settled the rationality argument. It's a bit further back in the thread in case you haven't seen it yet.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

I agree with you; it would be better classified as the simplest definition. Also, I feel that Atkins has already settled the rationality argument. It's a bit further back in the thread in case you haven't seen it yet.

haha... I was totally thinking this to myself.. Thanks