Thread: Are false lucids a sign of progress or failure

Well this thread got tl;dr for me but I wanted to jump in. (Geez, this is why I like staying in my own little corner of DV ) I don't like the term false lucid either In fact, I hate it. But I think it's all moot point since (*cringe*) false lucid = non lucid. I like to keep things simple and if I over-think things as much as you all seem to do I tend to get really discouraged and overwhelmed. I mean, why do we have to get so technical? Maybe it's just me but I intuitively know if I was really lucid regardless of whether or not the dream mimicked lucidity in every way. I have had dreams like that and deep down I know that it was not a lucid dream. I'm able to admit that, learn from it and move on. IMHO all that's important is that we aim to get lucid regularly and then we continue to learn to have higher awareness for longer periods of time. Call it what the hell you want to and then try for better next time. I'd rather put my efforts toward getting better then trying to label everything and worry how high or low my lucidity is.

BTW I hope I don't sound tacky here I mean no disrespect or anger toward anyone. (Hard to tell in text format sometimes)

The good thing about this thread is that it does illustrate exactly why the staff needs to define, agree, and adhere to a general "lucidity doctrine" or something similar. But maybe that is just opening a whole other can of worms.

Regardless of opinion, Sageous is and always will be the bomb!
Oh and the rest of you too I suppose.