Thread: A Treatise on Proof

Okay thanks, this last response has helped clarify things quite a bit for me.

Originally Posted by Sageous

Okay guys. Aside from giving me flashbacks to what I went through with this thread originally, I have to say that you might be missing my overall point.

Sorry about that. I know it gets tiring when people continue failing to grasp a point, or asking questions that don't seem relevant. I saw that you seemed to encounter that quite a bit earlier on, so I tried my best to cut down on the length of my response and focus on just a couple main points, which would be easy to clear up if I misunderstood them. (and you've since done so)

Originally Posted by Sageous

Well, although they weren't your criteria, you did essentially make them your own by saying (from #58), "if during the dream you can pass any or all of those four corollaries [...] then you're certainly lucid".

No. I didn't.

Sorry; we were using the term in different ways. I wasn't implying that they became something integral to your OP/treatise or anything, I was merely pointing out that by referencing something, then making a statement about it, that statement is still yours and can be legitimately referenced by those coming later. (as you seemed to be brushing off what was said--from your point of view, it probably seemed unimportant, but to me it was still important because it seemed contradictory to some of your other statements)

I've reread that part of the post several times now, and I still cannot understand how you drew the conclusion that I decided those criteria worked to confirm that you were lucid after you woke up.

As mentioned above, I didn't mean you took those criteria and made them part of your main point/treatise. However, I did see them as being discordant with some of the other statements.

The following example is to help illustrate the way I understood those statements quoted: Let's say you have a kid, and your kid went out to play. He came back, and was mad because he'd been in a race, but his friends said he hadn't won even though he passed them up.

You then tell him: "If during a race you can pass all of the other racers, then you're certainly winning"

Now compare with your statement: "If during the dream you can pass any or all of those four corollaries [...] then you're certainly lucid"

Just as the kid could validly understand his dad's statement as meaning, "Oh, now that you've told me, I can look back and verify that I was winning, after the fact",

So also, one could validly understand your statement as meaning, "Oh, now that you've told me, I can look back and verify that I was lucid, after the fact". (especially if that person does not view dream memories to be as unreliable as you do)

And in fact, this is exactly how I understood your statement at first!

English is often ambiguous, and in this case led to genuine uncertainty for me in multiple places in this thread. The above is just one of the more uncertain ones, that I felt was unclear enough to warrant confirmation.

(And I understand that there was context that supported your actual meaning. But to me it still wasn't conclusive.)

Originally Posted by Sageous

As well as (from #58): "Of course you can prove to yourself during the dream that you are lucid, with RC's, memory, and certain self-awareness confirmations like those four corollaries. To say otherwise would be absurd."

However, I think I understand now that you're making a clear distinction between proof during a dream and proof upon waking.

If you understand that, then why are you still asking about it?

As mentioned above: Because I still wasn't sure! Part of it was that the idea itself seemed somewhat of a stretch, to be that strict; and there were multiple statements that seemed to support a less extreme interpretation. So while I viewed it as the most likely reading, I decided I should also provide some of the statements that made me question that reading.

Originally Posted by Sageous

Question 2) Now forget the scenario above, and pretend there's some other time, a week later say, where you just woke up. You have the feeling that you just exited a dream. So you think back, and remember a point in your dream where you checked all 4 of the criteria above, and they all passed. Of course, it's always possible your memory is faulty, but as much as you can remember, you checked the 4 criteria, and they really did pass (i.e. as much as you can remember, you really did know the dream objects would disappear, you really did know that physical laws need not apply, etc.). Is this sufficient to prove to you, now having awoken, that you were lucid in the dream?

No, it is not.

I would never define my lucidity based on fading memories of doing things like confirming those criteria. That, in fact, was pretty much the point of the treatise. Proof doesn't come from the content of the dream (especially if you must struggle to remember it), but in the quality of its memory: A true LD will be a part of your memory, of your conscious experience, and you will be able to remember that you were lucid without needing to refer to the narrative itself. [This is likely another "you have to be there" bit that likely requires much more explanation, I know, but time and space aren't allowing it, this time.]

Okay.

To me this sounds overly strict! But it's interesting to hear that some people evaluate all of their dreams in this way, and in a sense is even encouraging, as it means it's possible to have these "high-level lucids", as I call them myself, much more frequently.

Perhaps I'll come to see it more this way over time, but for now it's an interesting view that I'll keep in the background, as I continue practicing.

Thank you for taking the time to respond! -- I know you've done a good bit of it over the lifespan of this thread, and I appreciate your thoroughness.

^^ Not to beat a dead horse, because I think we're done here, but I can't resist playing with your analogy:

Originally Posted by Venryx

The following example is to help illustrate the way I understood those statements quoted: Let's say you have a kid, and your kid went out to play. He came back, and was mad because he'd been in a race, but his friends said he hadn't won even though he passed them up.

You then tell him: "If during a race you can pass all of the other racers, then you're certainly winning"

Now compare with your statement: "If during the dream you can pass any or all of those four corollaries [...] then you're certainly lucid"

Just as the kid could validly understand his dad's statement as meaning, "Oh, now that you've told me, I can look back and verify that I was winning, after the fact",

So also, one could validly understand your statement as meaning, "Oh, now that you've told me, I can look back and verify that I was lucid, after the fact". (especially if that person does not view dream memories to be as unreliable as you do)

Now, let's reexamine that race.

Let's say that sure, there was a race, and the kid was there, but let's say now that he was much smaller than the other kids, and they really didn't want him in it... but he ran anyway.

The race started, and the rest of the kids were quickly lost in the distance, so the kid was left to race by himself -- which he did, and did quite well; being a kid: In his imagination he had a great surge of energy and accelerated to lightning speed, passing the bigger boys as though they were standing still! His adventure was so vivid that, during the race, he knew he passed all the other kids. It never happened, but the image of doing so was, for him thanks to his his child's imagination, very real -- during his imagined race.

Later, with the images of his fantasy victory already fading but still vaguely present as an apparent moment of reality, the kid catches up with the other kids and tells them how well he did -- because he still sort of remembers doing so, and it still seems real, and important, to him. Being bound by reality and their own experience, the bigger kids are confused, and simply laugh at him; which only triggers defense mechanisms in the kid that make him feel even more strongly that he had passed the others.

So he goes home in tears, and his father -- without knowing about the fantasy victory -- only asks him if he remembers knowing that he passed the other kids, which the kid affirms; so dear old Dad says "If during a race you can pass all of the other racers, then you're certainly winning" And the kid cheers up, happy that someone has confirmed his version of reality.

The boy, in truth, passed no one, but in his need to fit in he afforded himself a fantasy of winning the race and then chose later on to believe that the fantasy had actually happened, because he still possessed a fading memory of doing just that -- and, of course, he really wanted to believe that memory.

It's perhaps not a great analogy, but it makes its point (for me at least): the kid's criterion for winning the race -- passing the other boys -- was certainly met during his fantasy of doing so; even though he wasn't even in the actual race. Later, even though he was shown reality in no uncertain terms (catching up to the boys later, when they should have been catching up to him, and them laughing at him), he chose instead to believe he had won, simply because he had a dim memory of doing so, thanks to the fantasy and his father's convenient advice.

Now let's reverse the story and say that the kid actually did race, and actually did win. But later on, when he comes home and tells his father proudly that he won, his father doesn't believe him, because his son is so small. Though he'll be hurt that his father was unsupportive, the kid won't change is story, because, thanks the the strong, waking-life consciousness memory he has of passing the other boys, he knows he won the race -- and he knows it not because he affirms that "during the the race he passed the other boys," but because he was there.

Okay, maybe I mangled this analogy a bit too much, and inserted a psychotic episode into the story, but hopefully I made my point: Those criteria work just fine as confirmations of lucidity if you are lucid; but unfortunately they also work just fine as confirmations if you are dreaming about being lucid. So, lucid or not, the criteria are effective for confirming lucidity. What makes them work properly during the dream is that if lucid you already know you're lucid, so, like a RC, they are just affirming the obvious: It isn't the criteria themselves, but your mindset that is confirming lucidity. Conversely: upon waking, you may instead remember, vaguely, that you confirmed all the criteria, but you have no memory of that mindset (no clear recent conscious memory of lucidity, of presence in the moment), so you choose to assume that you must have been lucid, even though you were only dreaming about lucidity. In the end, then, it is not those criteria that determined whether you were lucid, but how you remember meeting them.

Again, this was the whole point of post #58, and pretty much the thread in general. Since there are so many ways we can convince ourselves that we were lucid, and many of those ways can be wrong or misleading (like remembering, "for sure," that we met those criteria in what is really a rapidly fading NLD about being lucid), there needs to be some way to determine, for ourselves, that the dream was a LD.... that way, for me, is in the quality of the memory. Was it a clear, waking-life consciousness memory? Then it was a LD. Was it a fading flash of memory, just like any other NLD? Then it may not have been a LD. It really is that simple... and those 4 criteria really have nothing whatsoever to do with that final, simple resolution that occurs after waking.

Okay, now I'm just rambling and sort of having too much fun with this analogy. Whether we disagree or not, I think at least we're finally all on the same page here, so I'll call it a day.

Originally Posted by Sageous

^^ Not to beat a dead horse, because I think we're done here, but I can't resist playing with your analogy:



Now, let's reexamine that race.

Let's say that sure, there was a race, and the kid was there, but let's say now that he was much smaller than the other kids, and they really didn't want him in it... but he ran anyway.

The race started, and the rest of the kids were quickly lost in the distance, so the kid was left to race by himself -- which he did, and did quite well; being a kid: In his imagination he had a great surge of energy and accelerated to lightning speed, passing the bigger boys as though they were standing still! His adventure was so vivid that, during the race, he knew he passed all the other kids. It never happened, but the image of doing so was, for him thanks to his his child's imagination, very real -- during his imagined race.

Later, with the images of his fantasy victory already fading but still vaguely present as an apparent moment of reality, the kid catches up with the other kids and tells them how well he did -- because he still sort of remembers doing so, and it still seems real -- and important -- to him. Being bound by reality and their own experience, the bigger kids are confused, and simply laugh at him; which only triggers defense mechanisms in the kid that make him feel even more strongly that he had passed the others.

So he goes home in tears, and his father -- without knowing about the fantasy victory -- only asks him if he remembers knowing that he passed the other kids, which the kid affirms; so he says "If during a race you can pass all of the other racers, then you're certainly winning" And the kid cheers up, happy that someone has confirmed his version of reality.

The boy, in truth, passed no one, but in his need to fit in he afforded himself a fantasy of winning the race and then chose later on to believe that the fantasy had actually happened, because he still possessed a fading memory of doing just that -- and, of course, he really wanted to believe that memory.

It's perhaps not a great analogy, but it makes its point (for me at least): the kid's criterion for winning the race -- passing the other boys -- was certainly met during his fantasy of doing so; even though he wasn't even in the actual race. Later, even though he was shown reality in no uncertain terms (catching up to the boys later, when they should have been catching up to him, and them laughing at him), he chose instead to believe he had won, simply because he had a dim memory of doing so, thanks to the fantasy.

Now let's reverse the story and say that the kid actually did race, and actually did win. But later on, when he comes home and tells his father proudly that he won, his father doesn't believe him, because his son is so small. Though he'll be hurt that his father was unsupportive, the kid won't change is story, because, thanks the the strong, waking-life consciousness memory he has of passing the other boys, he knows he won the race -- and he knows it not because he affirms that "during the the race he passed the other boys," but because he was there.

Indeed, those are plausible scenarios as extensions of the analogy, and they make your points finely. (they were also narrated well, so were fun to read!)

Originally Posted by Sageous

Okay, maybe I mangled this analogy a bit too much, and inserted a psychotic episode into the story, but hopefully I made my point: Those criteria work just fine as confirmations of lucidity if you are lucid; but unfortunately they also work just fine as confirmations if you are dreaming about being lucid. So, lucid or not, the criteria are effective for confirming lucidity. What makes them work properly during the dream is that if lucid you already know you're lucid, so, like a RC, they are just affirming the obvious: It isn't the criteria themselves, but your mindset that is confirming lucidity. Conversely: upon waking, you may instead remember, vaguely, that you confirmed all the criteria, but you have no memory of that mindset (no clear recent conscious memory of lucidity), so you choose to assume that you must have been lucid, even though you were only dreaming about lucidity. In the end, then, it is not those criteria that determined whether you were lucid, but how you remember meeting them.

Again, this was the whole point of post #58, and pretty much the thread in general. Since there are so many ways we can convince ourselves that we were lucid, and many of those ways can be wrong or misleading (like remembering, "for sure," that we met those criteria in what is really a rapidly fading NLD about being lucid), there needs to be some way to determine, for ourselves, that the dream was a LD.... that way, for me, is in the quality of the memory. Was it a clear, waking-life consciousness memory? Then it was a LD. Was it a fading flash of memory, just like any other NLD? Then it may not have been a LD. It really is that simple... and those criteria really have nothing whatsoever to do with that final, simple resolution that occurs after waking.

Okay, now I'm just rambling and sort of having too much fun with this analogy. Whether we disagree or not, I think at least we're finally all on the same page here, so I'll call it a day.

Yep!

I'm not trying to argue anything. I just made comments. How am I confusing different aspects of memory? I know what you mean about remembering the lucid of any level. I agree with you there but what do you mean no access to memory when lucid? This might be new to me since I've always been able to access some kind of memory.How is it even possible to have no memory and be lucid?Ohhh. I see now. So you would only know its a dream in that scenario but you can't remember any waking life memory.I had dreams like that before but I considered them non lucid.This was because i knew it was a dream but there were too many elements to the dream that i felt were real. Probably due to not having waking life memory. What you said does matter. I used a different scenario like forgetting in the dream but I was basically saying the same thing.hm...Even though I'm pretty confident in my ways and memory for telling if I'm lucid or not it helps to read posts about this topic. It boosts my confidence more and lets me prove to myself that I'm lucid when I feel its time to do a check just in case. Although the feeling of being there and aware is strong it is good to test/reevaluate yourself at times.

^^ I could be wrong, but I've found that it is possible to know you are dreaming without having any functional, conscious, access to memory.

You can be self-aware in a dream and yet fail to remember, say, your dream goals, or perhaps that your physical body is asleep where you left it. From my experience (both mine and what I've heard from many others), most LD's fail to have access to memory as a component. Accessing memory, in fact, indicates for me an achievement of a higher level of lucidity.

I think you should count yourself lucky if you've always got access to memory in your LD's; that may indeed be a rarity!

I go on more about memory, and might be a little more clear than I can be here, in my thread called Memory:The forgotten Fundamental; you can check it out here, if you're interested.... and happily, I wrote it much more recently than the Treatise on Proof thread, so hopefully it will make more sense!

^^ I just read your edit, DawnEye, and I see we're on the same page... yay!

Oh, cool! Im still a little confused though. XD

So when your thinking about your dream goals it doesn't trigger other parts of your memory? How would the not recalling dream goal scenario play out with no waking life memory? I can see how its possible to be somewhat lucid after forgetting where your physical body is.Depending on the dream I would consider it semi lucid until I remember where my real body is. But even then there's always some waking life memory with me. Can you give me some examples from your dreams? If not ill read the thread you made about memory. I wanna know more. Thanks for explaining to me. : D

I finished reading your post on memory Sageous. I liked it and it left me with no questions. Im still interested in reading your dreams where you had no waking life memory though. ^.^

^^ Since this thread is, oddly, sort of about remembering, and not memory (if that makes any sense), I don't want to head to far off topic, but as long as I'm here:

Originally Posted by DawnEye11

So when your thinking about your dream goals it doesn't trigger other parts of your memory?

Sure it does. In fact, remembering your dream goals (or, say, your sleeping body) is an excellent way to gain and maintain access to memory during a dream.

How would the not recalling dream goal scenario play out with no waking life memory?

Well, if you have no access at all to waking-life memory, then you won't remember your dream goals -- which sort of simultaneously complements and runs counter to what I said a second ago.

This is because self-awareness is also in the formula for successful LD'ing, and hasn't been mentioned yet: if you are able to gather your self-awareness (essentially your lucidity) in a dream, you should eventually come to a point where you realize that you should be remembering something (like those goals), especially if your day-work includes building an interest in remembering to remember -- and also if you're interested in rounding our your presence in your dream. So self-awareness can provide that initial trigger to remember something, and thus gain access to memory.

I can see how its possible to be somewhat lucid after forgetting where your physical body is.Depending on the dream I would consider it semi lucid until I remember where my real body is.

Me, too... but I've found that that is not the prevailing measure of lucidity in the LD'ing community; it seems that simply knowing that you're dreaming is enough.

But even then there's always some waking life memory with me. Can you give me some examples from your dreams? If not ill read the thread you made about memory.

Again, that is impressive! I really don't have time to dig up some examples of my own dreams that lack access to memory, but let me put it this way: Since, for me at least, LD's are very much a Here&Now event, the priority in low-level lucids is knowing you are dreaming, and often that is enough; the world provided by your dreaming mind can remain as real as it was before you were lucid, even though you know it's not real (paradoxes are common in a discipline where the first rule is being awake while you are asleep, I guess); you can know you are dreaming while still working with the "memories" provided by your unconscious/dreaming mind.

Okay I thought of an example: The other day I was in a dream where I was exploring an enormous mansion with a family of strangers who apparently were deciding what to do with it since the family patriarch who owned it had died. The dream went on for a long time (easily an hour), much happened, much was discovered, there was lots of intrigue among the heirs, visits to the mansion's three pools and the impoverished city streets that it directly abutted (with no room for pools), and throughout that entire time I knew I was dreaming, that none of this was real. But never once did I, say, try to remember where I may have seen this house before, or who these people were (or, more directly, that there were other, more important things that I wanted to be doing with my dream time); I simply accepted them as contextually real because they had occupied the complete history of my current dream. Also, never once did I give a thought to my waking-life self or my dream goals... I just rode along in the dream, knowing it was a dream, but unable (or unwilling?) to take a step up in my presence and remember. I'm not sure if that made sense; I hate examples, but it's what I thought of.

At any rate, I'm glad you're checking out that other thread; I think you might like it.

[EDIT: I just read though it and see that this whole post is a bit of a mess; it's getting late here! Well, hopefully it'll make at least a little sense...]

Originally Posted by Sageous

^^ Since this thread is, oddly, sort of about remembering, and not memory (if that makes any sense), I don't want to head to far off topic, but as long as I'm here:


Sure it does. In fact, remembering your dream goals (or, say, your sleeping body) is an excellent way to gain and maintain access to memory during a dream.

Well, if you have no access at all to waking-life memory, then you won't remember your dream goals -- which sort of simultaneously complements and runs counter to what I said a second ago.

This is because self-awareness is also in the formula for successful LD'ing, and hasn't been mentioned yet: if you are able to gather your self-awareness (essentially your lucidity) in a dream, you should eventually come to a point where you realize that you should be remembering something (like those goals), especially if your day-work includes building an interest in remembering to remember -- and also if you're interested in rounding our your presence in your dream. So self-awareness can provide that initial trigger to remember something, and thus gain access to memory.


Me, too... but I've found that that is not the prevailing measure of lucidity in the LD'ing community; it seems that simply knowing that you're dreaming is enough.



Again, that is impressive! I really don't have time to dig up some examples of my own dreams that lack access to memory, but let me put it this way: Since, for me at least, LD's are very much a Here&Now event, the priority in low-level lucids is knowing you are dreaming, and often that is enough; the world provided by your dreaming mind can remain as real as it was before you were lucid, even though you know it's not real (paradoxes are common in a discipline where the first rule is being awake while you are asleep, I guess); you can know you are dreaming while still working with the "memories" provided by your unconscious/dreaming mind.

Okay I thought of an example: The other day I was in a dream where I was exploring an enormous mansion with a family of strangers who apparently were deciding what to do with it since the family patriarch who owned it had died. The dream went on for a long time (easily an hour), much happened, much was discovered, there was lots of intrigue among the heirs, visits to the mansion's three pools and the impoverished city streets that it directly abutted (with no room for pools), and throughout that entire time I knew I was dreaming, that none of this was real. But never once did I, say, try to remember where I may have seen this house before, or who these people were (or, more directly, that there were other, more important things that I wanted to be doing with my dream time); I simply accepted them as contextually real because they had occupied the complete history of my current dream. Also, never once did I give a thought to my waking-life self or my dream goals... I just rode along in the dream, knowing it was a dream, but unable (or unwilling?) to take a step up in my presence and remember. I'm not sure if that made sense; I hate examples, but it's what I thought of.

At any rate, I'm glad you're checking out that other thread; I think you might like it.

[EDIT: I just read though it and see that this whole post is a bit of a mess; it's getting late here! Well, hopefully it'll make at least a little sense...]

No worries. I understood your post.Thanks for the explanation. It cleared up everything for me. I have no more questions for now but Ill continue reading the memory thread when I have time

This is an interesting read that may not even need the response I'm about to post, as I admit I read the first page or two then sort of skipped around.

Spoiler for TL;DR - Graphics showing my thoughts on levels of lucidity:

I'm undecided on where exactly the line falls between a lucid dream and "dreaming that you are lucid", and I believe it's because (like waking awareness) there isn't a hard line to be found. Imagine this example, where blue represents non-lucidity and orange represents lucidity:



Tell me, at which point does the color transition from blue to orange? Square F maybe? After all, F is right at the halfway mark, so if the transition happens anywhere it should be there. If that's where we choose to draw the line, then G should definitely be in the "orange"(lucid) category and E should definitely be in the "blue"(non-lucid) category. To verify that, let's compare those colors with A (which we know for certain is blue/non-lucid) and K (which we know for certain is orange/lucid) as a litmus test of sorts:



I don't know about you, but I wouldn't label the color of square G as being in the "orange" family. So what about square E then?



Lavender maybe, "blue" it certainly isn't. I think this dynamic is very similar to the concept of lucidity and why it's difficult to pin-point where exactly it "happens". So where do we draw the line then? Well, in my 15+ years of practicing LDing, my dream experiences would translate into a color spectrum that looks a little more like this:

• A = Dreams where I am completely oblivious to the fact that I am dreaming. I am 100% bought into the experience as being real, and have zero questions regarding the truth behind them, regardless of how absurd those experiences are.
  -
  
• B = Dreams where I still believe what I am experiencing is real, but I at least recognize the bizzareness of what is happening. Some things just don't seem normal, but I lack sufficient awareness to question the truthfulness of the experience itself.
  -
  
• D = These are those dreams where I speak and behave as if I am lucid, but I still lack that certain "waking awareness". Ironically, I usually have excellent dream control in these types of dreams...maybe because I'm not burdened by a waking rational which is conditioned to believe that certain things are impossible?
  -
  
• G = This is what I would consider a base-level lucid dream; the real thing. There is a night-and-day difference in terms of appreciating the foreign nature of the experience. I know it's not real, but I'm still very much at the mercy of the dream. It's like being a lucid bystander in someone else's non-lucid dream.
  -
  
• H = These are where the majority of my LDs fall. More awareness to the fact that I'm dreaming and more waking rationale. I see the bigger picture. I don't "play into the dream" nearly as much as G-type LDs, I remember dream goals and stabilization techniques, etc.
  -
  
• J = Noticed how I skipped I? These dreams are notably different than my normal LDs, and I've only had a few of them. My awareness is equal to that when I am awake. I'm calm, sharp, and sure of myself in a way that is only half there in H-type LDs. Navigating the dream is second nature, very little doubt in (and resistance to) my will as the dreamer. No fogginess, no forgetfulness, no impairment over my normal waking cognition.
  -
  
• K = The level of LD I have yet to have. I'm sure there is a higher level than what I've currently attained (maybe even a few) so I wanted to leave room for it.

For me, the line between lucid and non-lucid dreams has to do with recognizing that the dream is a foreign entity. It has nothing to do with dream control or reality checks, but a perspective that is coming from "outside" of the dream. That's the best I can describe it. With higher levels of lucidity, the foreign feeling of the dream lessens (as your understanding that the dream is actually you really sinks in) but it lessens due to more awareness, not less awareness as is the case in non-LDs. Hope that makes sense. So, for me, the proof is not in what happens during the dream, but rather from what vantage point your are experiencing the dream.

^ I've definitely felt that the line for lucidity isn't a hard one, and TheUncanny has an interesting, thought-provoking perspective. I've even had at least one or two unusual dreams in which I seemed to understand that I was asleep but not necessarily that I was dreaming (there was one, for instance, in which I believed I was in a NREM state, but the way in which I awoke from it made me afterwards suspect that it was actually a cleverly-disguised REM dream); these can be really challenging to try to classify.

The way I remember my better-quality LDs indeed seems like how Sageous says it should be. But I've sort of felt that my lower-level LDs tend to fall more in between how I would remember a NLD vs. an LD, in what sometimes seems a not-so-clear-cut manner, even though (if I understand correctly) Sageous feels that there should still be a clear difference for low-level/semilucid LDs vs. NLDs. So I think I'm going to start trying to remember to pay close attention to how my recall of my dreams (both lucid and nonlucid) is right upon awakening so I can understand more clearly and be more sure exactly what is happening.

Okay, so it's been a while, but I have spent some time thinking about what I wrote in the last post and observing my dream-recalling process. Here are my current observations and conclusions.

As I mentioned above, I was somewhat puzzled that even dreams I truly feel (even after careful, honest consideration) were true lucid dreams sometimes seem more fuzzy to recall than it seems they should. But, when I thought about it, I realized that maybe this isn't so strange after all. I suspect that perhaps my memory and visualization of sensory imagery don't happen to be super-amazing: If, in waking life, I went to a place I've never been, even an intriguing, very interesting one, but only once and for just a few minutes, I think there's a chance that I could have some trouble afterwards recalling a particularly clear picture of it, despite it having been a waking-life event (especially if there were a lot of other interesting things going on competing for my focus and attention). And it turns out this is precisely the type of experience that many of my LDs are. So, in that case, perhaps the “somewhat fuzzy” memory of such a LD event is in fact behaving exactly as any other waking-life-event memory would be expected to.

On the other hand, I think I have noticed an aspect of my waking-life-level memory that typically does retain relatively consistent clarity even when everything else seems foggy: that of my actions, my overall train of thought, the decisions I made and my reasoning behind them, etc. After a LD, I seem to generally have no trouble remembering these things reasonably clearly (as when recalling a recent waking-life event), whereas after NLDs they frequently seem much more nebulous and poorly-defined when I try to recall them.

In fact, I now think this may be how I've been evaluating my dreams for a while, without really realizing it. If I feel I can remember with enough clarity that my train of thought included, whether implicitly or explicitly, some kind of perspective of my inhabiting something other than waking reality, I tend to consider that decent evidence of lucidity. An interesting recent example was a dream I awoke from with an odd—almost instinctual, even—hunch that there had been a slight element of lucidity. I could remember the gist of the dream pretty well, including my actions and thoughts, and though I seemed to be operating on a back-of-the-mind notion that I was currently dreaming toward the end, my thoughts were strikingly nonverbal and subtle, making it seemingly difficult to tell for certain. But when I realized I was able to recall those nonverbal thoughts, complete with even some subtle nuances that I found actually rather difficult to translate directly into words, I concluded that this must have been at least a semilucid dream. It seems unlikely that I would have had a good recollection (if any at all) of such subtleties had it been a NLD.

Another possible factor is that, as I've spent the last couple of years practicing and becoming familiar with the state of lucidity (a.k.a. self-awareness) both during my waking life and sleep, it feels more like there is a sort of “feeling” of being in the state as opposed to not being in it. It's subtle and hard to put into words, but this is another thing I look for when recalling a suspected LD: Do I actually remember having that distinct “feeling” of being self-aware?

^^ That seems an excellent process to develop (or is it discover?) for your situation, and I daresay it represents a nice bit of introspection and self-awareness.

It also points out that there is a lot of gray area in this whole "proof" thing, and that what we call a normal conscious memory can and does vary from person to person... but that gray area can be defined and dealt with if you've got a good self-awareness practice going!

This also, I think, nicely points out the importance of developing waking-life memory, or at least our sense of it...

Originally Posted by Sageous

2.[/I][/B] When retelling the dream, if the dreamer says things like “And then this happened to me,” or “And then that dream character said that to me,” he is very likely retelling a non-lucid dream. Lucidity means, by definition, that the dreamer is consciously involved in the dream, and that he is actively affecting the dream, simply because he knows that everything in this dream is his. To tell it like someone else was in charge betrays the fact that you were not, and the dream was not lucid -- or at least not terribly lucid.

Seriously? When someone says something like this automatically makes me think they have no idea that they're talking about.

You're really going to try and say that a dream isn't really lucid because someone describes unexpected events happening, or a dream character says something that the dreamer didn't consciously intend for it to say?

Lucidity has nothing to do with dream control. If you know you are dreaming while you are in a dream you are lucid, period, end of story. I'm surprised this is a sticky thread.

^^ Deep sigh... I haven't seen one of those posts in a while...

I hope you might consider reading on in the thread, Caradon, because if you do I think you should see that I eventually retracted #2 after lots of protest and some reconsideration of my own.

Also, It's been a long time, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't say lucidity must include dream control; if I did, I probably made an adjustment later in the thread as well, because I do not believe that. Be assured that I do not equate "affecting the reality of the dream" with dream control -- think of it more as being aware of your presence in the dream, just as you are aware of your presence in waking-life reality, where you have very little control... I could say that advanced LD'ing should include some control (or the ability to do so, if you feel like it), but that is a different discussion.

Again, I hope you'll read on; I'd hate to think you'll ignore all my posts from now on because you don't think I know what I'm talking about!

I admit before hand that I have not read most of the thread. Now, many years later, do you still feel you remember ALL of your lucids like waking life memories, or was I reading that wrong. I have heard you mention this before and it does not match with my own experience. I certainly have hundreds of memories that seem real and will be with as long as any memory. Those times are awesome/ With me, if I do not drill recall every once in awhile I can forget amazing LDs. I spent the last year or so having wonderful lucid adventures, which I am sure I will remember, perhaps even taking time to focus on it becoming a memory only to wake up and be like, "something about hiking and a girl?"
Not disagreeing with you if your experience differs from mine, just curious.

^^ Yes, I do still feel that I remember all my LD's as I do waking-life memories... and I also can't help but wonder if your experience might be closer to mine than you think!

I can't remember right now, and I'm far too lazy to look through the thread, but I think this came up somewhere in the discussion; hopefully what I say now vaguely resembles what I said then:

Yes, my LD's are, to me, remembered in the same manner that my waking-life moments are remembered. However, like most of us, I have a whole lot of waking-life moments that I can't remember at at all, especially these days -- for instance, I can't readily tell you what movie I watched last night, even though I was wide awake and enjoying it for 2 hours of my waking-life (with a bit of a struggle I can probably come up with it... ah... wait a second ... there were waves; big ones ... here it comes ... The Perfect Storm, I think it was). By the same token, many of my more mundane lucid moments get lost, or only come back when I review my DJ's (which is a good reason to keep a DJ, BTW). And these days I pretty much forget most of the "I'm dreaming" moments where lucidity is low, just as I forget most moments in waking-life where lucidity -- or sensory/emotional -- input is low. Not everything needs to be recorded, I guess.

However, I also have many "awesome" waking-life moments that I remember like they happened five minutes ago, and with which know I will never part -- for instance, the moment I proposed to my wife 34 years ago last month. By the same token, I also have many awesome lucid moments that are remembered the same way -- for instance, the moment I turned and faced down the yellow T-Rex that was chasing me, again, when I was about 5 (now that was a moment!).

So yes, it does seem that my more excellent LD'ing moments do indeed get stored just like my more excellent waking-life (and occasionally lucid) moments. But, like waking-life memory, not all of it is saved, or at least isn't saved well, because some moments just aren't awesome enough to properly file away. I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that perhaps, Sivason, you may be cataloging your experiences in the same way, given that LD'ing is a staple of your conscious life ... now that you're a wizened-old dream yogi, you really don't need to save all your lucid moments because sometimes they just weren't that awesome.

Also, I think this thread was aimed at the sort of LD'er who was still having that "AHA!" moment when lucid, a moment that is very difficult to forget. Grizzled old veterans like us (and I think a few of the folks who posted here) might not be, for better or worse, having those moments any more, so we might just be allowing lots of lucid experiences to drift away, just as we do with waking-life experience. [that sounded way better in my head, BTW]

That said:

Finally, and perhaps to the point of this thread, here's something to think about: maybe some of those wonderful lucid adventures you had over the last year weren't really all that lucid, but instead were low-level lucids, or even NLD's that happened to have you knowing you were lucid built into their plot? In your unique case -- and given my own time-earned ability to remember immediately upon waking if I were lucid or not -- this is likely not true, but, in the spirit of this thread, it might be something to consider.


tl;dr: Yeah, I'm still of the same mind; for me every self-aware dreaming moment worth remembering gets stored the same way every waking-life moment worth remembering gets stored.

... of course, I could be wrong; memory is funny that way!

Thanks. I certainly do not store most of my waking moments for very long.