Thread: Who or what should we blame for the lack of lucidity ?

1. Does self-awareness coax in dreams by means of a habit(making it second nature). I know this is a question you just talked about, but if the memory responsible for such maintainance of a habit seems to be linked to intention. I will explain: Not all habits coax to dreams, but habits that we use intention to support seem to coax well

.

Intention and habit are opposite (or at least different) things. An habit is something you do unconsciously, or at least a behavior that is integrated on your daily events. Intention implies a conscious attitude towards something. I get what you're trying to say though, and I honestly don't know what makes the "intent" influencing the "habit" in dreams: my view is that it's prospective memory that is helping you remembering something. Prospective memory can still take effect under distraction or temporal distance between the reminder and the cue, especially if we're talking about event-based prospective memory. In simple terms:

- While you develop the habit, prospective memory takes a larger role (you need to "work for lucidity);
- After the habit get's implemented, it still won't happen all the time (I can't comment on lucidity like hukif's/sageous/sivanson in here), but you need less reminders. I got no clue why, in this particular aspect I'm just speculating, so other theories would be welcomed

2. When making self-awareness a habit and using intention to support it, does it actually coax to the dream(has there been direct studies to show that?)

LouaiB: the (I think) most recent meta-analysis on lucid dreaming technique effectiveness highlighted one thing: Poor methodological quality of all studies regarding EVERY technique listed. Yes, that includes LaBerge's MILD. Guess that should give you an idea of what the answer for that question is xD

I got confused a little. What part of the memory is responsible for habits? Do we know how much impared it is during dreams?
Also, a habit of self-awareness is better than a habit of RCs because it becomes second nature. So, if the part of the memory that is responsible for habit is partially on, it will have a better chance to leak to the dream even if not making you lucid, it will activate the memory to a furthur extent, thus helping getting lucid

RCs is a great habit too.
Sageous: I'm sure Zoth meant that self-awareness isn't a necessary tool for achieving lucidity. Of course self-awareness is important to maintain thr lucidity, but he is specifically talking about the induction part. Also, he knows that the Novadreamer doesn't make you lucid, but only give a stimuli, like a dreamsign, and when combined with MILD(and self-awareness IF the prospective memory is impared during dreams), would be a very great way to focus your efforts on a apecific point.

I still want to continue this argument. It seems very productive.

Originally Posted by LouaiB

RCs is a great habit too.
Sageous: I'm sure Zoth meant that self-awareness isn't a necessary tool for achieving lucidity. Of course self-awareness is important to maintain thr lucidity, but he is specifically talking about the induction part. Also, he knows that the Novadreamer doesn't make you lucid, but only give a stimuli, like a dreamsign, and when combined with MILD(and self-awareness IF the prospective memory is impared during dreams), would be a very great way to focus your efforts on a apecific point.

I hope so... it didn't read that way to me; and will not, I think, read taht way to budding LD'ers looking for answers to their "barriers." I could of course be wrong!

I still want to continue this argument. It seems very productive.

Go for it! I'll probably drag myself back in too, because this stuff is definitely important.

Yes, I read that analysis, you posted a link to it(pdf). Yes, i was very disapointed.
Also, I would like to argue that if we can use prospective memory to carry a habit to the dream, I'd rather use the habit of self-awareness because it is an easier habit to coax, and it helps in becoming lucid in other aspacts(like increasing the access to memory).
But, is it true that self-awareness would be the best habit to choose? I think this is a very important question

Also, I would like to argue that if we can use prospective memory to carry a habit to the dream, I'd rather use the habit of self-awareness because it is an easier habit to coax, and it helps in becoming lucid in other aspacts(like increasing the access to memory).
But, is it true that self-awareness would be the best habit to choose? I think this is a very important question

Great question. Ultimately, it all comes down to habit implementations. There are studies that analysed the time it takes to implement an habit: for example drinking a cup of water might take 10 days, doing exercise every day might take 2 months. No one ever studied this for specific lucid dreaming habits, so no one knows the pay off. Despite everything, self-awareness, due the reasons you mentioned, still would be ahead of any other habit to induce lucidity, because of the extra advantages it brings after you become lucid. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't complement self-awareness exercises with others (like reality checking) which could take significant less time to implement - I tested this with reality checks, it took me 20-21 days to achieve the first lucid, but I got no clue how long it took to automate the habit which is all that really matters. Besides, habit automation in waking life and in dreams seem to have complex differences, which makes the question even harder.

Would love to hear other's people input regarding that question of yours.



quick edit: couldn't read your whole last post Sageous properly (im late!), but please don't assume I'm trying to "set" any rules. I got way less experience then many people posting here, and if I sound like I have all the answer just because my sentences look good, I don't. This isn't a dismissal of self-awareness: it's simply me trying to understand it and you shouldn't perceive my posts as if I'm trying to win an argument. I don't dismiss yours (or anyone's) input, I'm actually trying to get the ball rolling a bit more.

Originally Posted by Zoth

... couldn't read your whole last post Sageous properly (im late!), but please don't assume I'm trying to "set" any rules. I got way less experience then many people posting here, and if I sound like I have all the answer just because my sentences look good, I don't. This isn't a dismissal of self-awareness: it's simply me trying to understand it and you shouldn't perceive my posts as if I'm trying to win an argument. I don't dismiss yours (or anyone's) input, I'm actually trying to get the ball rolling a bit more.

Fair enough.

ok.
First, we need to determine what makes us know that we are dreaming. A dream sign or a spontaneous RC because of habit.
What makes us know that the dreamsign is dreamlike? We are aware of it, but lack the memory. So, we activate the memory to remember that this is unnatural. Any other aspect involved? Memory is categorized according to functions. We need to know what functions we need to use to become lucid, how to use them, to what extent they are active in a NLD, and what activates them(or increase the activity).
I think we should talk about every memory separatly.
This would be long, but is a huge step.

Also, the other aspect. Habit. We need to study what a habit is to the brain, how it works, what makes it work. Then, connect it to the first part I mentioned(because a habit is a matter of memory), so we can conclude what technique is best for exploiting habits.

Finally, we can deduce which method(s) is best for using memory, self-awareness and habits are best.
Expectation will be a factor of habits and intention will be a factor of prospective memory.

May we work without biases please( I am not implying that any of you are biased)

Originally Posted by LouaiB

ok.
First, we need to determine what makes us know that we are dreaming. A dream sign or a spontaneous RC because of habit.

Neither of these has ever caused me to become lucid. And I believe the same is true for many people. Usually I just spontaneously become lucid, and then comes the rush of excitement, followed by a couple of RC's just to confirm and then stabilization. However, I don't become lucid unless I've been thinking about it a lot lately and really trying to achieve it. So it's got a lot to do with just getting yourself thinking about it and expecting it to happen.

as somebody said here before
it's like everything, you just have to learn it ^^

vagaltone, we are gonna jack the thread for our own study.
I assume they will contribute. They have too! This is important for everybody

I would just like to say that this is an absolutely fabulous thread with all sorts of really important observations going on, it's going to take a while to digest all the various vews, thanks so much to all the contributors, and BrandonBoss can't wait to see your big post! Take your time and make it as long and detailed as necessary, I for one am not afraid of reading long posts!

Reading the argument about whether self-awareness is mandatory for Lucid Dreaming is making me feel like there might be different types of "Lucid Dreaming". I definitely have had dreams that I called lucid dreams that did not involve self-awareness but they went like this:
I realize I am in a lucid dreaming. I am not aware of the significance of this. I just know the name of the phenomenon. If I see people in those lucid dreams, I will sometimes believe that it really is them and that I am in a real world, although not the same one as the waking world. Then, you might say, you were not lucid dreaming. However, in those dreams, my awareness of my surroundings is greatly increased. It is a different experience then a usual dream. I think that although Zoth accepts this type of dream as a lucid dream, Sageous does not. Instead, he believes a lucid dream is an experience in which you become self-aware specifically. I think that's what they think.

In my opinion, we are are ALWAYS conscious in dreams. This is if you define consciousness as "being sentient". We obviously feel and experience our dreams, that's what they are, sensations. In some dreams, we become more observant and those dreams are more vivid, you might think a thought like "I am dreaming" (Without deeper understanding of it) and you start controlling your dream or acting differently. You've got yourself a dream that feels different, that you would classify as a lucid dream. If you have a dream, however, in which you become self-aware, that is, you are aware of yourself and your surroundings and the context and interactions between those two, you gain an even greater experience. I think this is perfectly parallel to our experience in real life.

Not having studied all the posts in depth - just jumping in to say:

Dreaming of lucidity is surely not happening in children, who never heard of it before - it is happening to those trying to learn LD and then dream of talking about it or some such - that is not the topic.

Yes Sageous - just the flash insight "This is a dream" is lucidity.
All else is down to practice and preference.

Lucidity is lucidity - and it is defined by that realization.
I find it very strange that you want to draw some imaginary line through lucid experiences and say - but only now it is real lucidity.
What for?
Sure - they have different lengths and quality - you might or might not remember all and everything, you have planned for the LD from waking life - you might get scared even while at the same time knowing it is a dream...

But even when I only shortly realize, that I am dreaming - that is the very same state of affairs, from which I had my higher level lucids in terms of length, control and memory.

It is like saying - no - you can not walk, until you are not able to do it on a high-wire!

Originally Posted by fogelbise

As far a child LDs. I feel that mine were not like Sageous describes but can imagine that many cases could be.

Why doubt other children`s lucidity - when you yourself know better?

Originally Posted by fogelbise

Back then I knew I was waking up from having occasional nightmares that were not real but were still scary maybe around 5-7 years old. My father told me about LDing as a way to take control.

My recollection was that my very next nightmare I stopped and remembered what my father said, realizing this was all just a dream during the dream and I defeated the monster.

Scary nightmares were rare after this. I still have nightmare-like scenes but they are very rarely scary. I went on to lots of flying and fun but like most people I eventually stopped paying attention to dreams unfortunately and fast forward decades later to me getting back into it recently. I agree my mindset is different now from then of course, but I am positive that my childhood LDs were true LDs.

So there we have it.
Fogelbise should be credible enough. One more classic case.

It must be hardwired and easily accessible - even if that hurts some people`s pride of having LDs as a well-earned and especially deserved achievement.
Nightmares - gets information - very next nightmare - not only lucidity in the sense of a short flash of realization - but with remembering information from waking life and putting it into practice.
And then going on with LD for fun - until it falls into forgetfulness/gets neglected.

Like our culture does that to us - less sleep, stress...
If you are not advised to keep up the practice for it's many, many benefits besides versus nightmares and for mere fun - that is what happens per default it seems.

I have repeated it loads - I do it once more - 6 people, whom I asked, my mother included - had LDs as a child and have very vivid and clearly valid memories of them.
That clearly means for me - there are others, who also had them among those I asked, who have simply forgotten them.
The core problem I see, why LD is not wide-spread is that children do not get acknowledged, supported and taught it.

I am convinced, they more or less all stumble over it at some time - or at least it is extremely easy for them in comparison to us adults, wanting to (newly or again) lucid dream.



Edit: Thank you VagalTone for supporting me with having talked to and being impressed by LDing children - tell us more maybe please?
My plan is actually to open a thread and give it a stab at arguing for LD being an evolutionary invention - after human consciousness - and after dreams in mammals.

Originally Posted by StephL

Yes Sageous - just the flash insight "This is a dream" is lucidity.
All else is down to practice and preference.

Lucidity is lucidity - and it is defined by that realization.
I find it very strange that you want to draw some imaginary line through lucid experiences and say - but only now it is real lucidity.
What for?
Sure - they have different lengths and quality - you might or might not remember all and everything, you have planned for the LD from waking life - you might get scared even while at the same time knowing it is a dream...

But even when I only shortly realize, that I am dreaming - that is the very same state of affairs, from which I had my higher level lucids in terms of length, control and memory.

It is like saying - no - you can not walk, until you are not able to do it on a high-wire!

Yeah, I get that a lot.

I could be wrong, I probably am wrong, about drawing that imaginary line, but I fear I will never stop doing it. This is because the things that happen after that flash of "knowing it's a dream" are so wonderful, and so worth exploring, that I will likely always think that there is a difference between opening the door to lucidity and walking through it. Also, it isn't so much requiring a tightrope walk to define walking as defining walking as something more than a toddler balancing and stepping forward for the first time -- even though its parents are shouting with joy because the baby is "walking."

Though I've also always felt there were several levels of LD'ing quality, and always will, I truly do not think you need to be a master of the art to appreciate LD'ing; just stepping through that door is enough! ... and I think that getting out of that doorway is what this thread was all about, so all the more reason I hold fast here and insist that, in order to really appreciate lucidity, you must do more than just have a moment of "Hey, this is a dream!" Yes, that moment of discovery is a very cool thing, but if you stop there, blocking that doorway, you have indeed formed a barrier to, yes, actual lucidity. And by dismissing the fundamentals in favor of flashy techniques, machines, or drugs that just get you to the door and no further, you are building a new, locked, door in front of then open one.

Sorry to disappoint, Steph -- for some reason it really bothers me...

Ok, maybe we should change the aproach a little. How about we see how we can use self-awareness and specific parts of the memory together for even better results( how to use MILD, RRC and RC together, maybe?)

On a small break at work so can't continue my previous post, but just wanted people to consider a small thing regarding this "what is lucidity" that StephL and Sageous are still discussing:

StephL, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if children had a much higher lucid dreaming frequency than most people expect: after all, they're forming brain connections at incredible rates, and unlike adults, at a huge development period when it comes to integrate experiences into their mental schemas. My question is:

What does that have to do with lucid dreaming being hard-wired into humans, or even being an evolutionary intention?

You do make a compelling point regarding lucidity as a process that would arise in our evolutionary path, but you're assuming that lucidity is an evolutionary product of consciousness, which in itself would be another evolutionary product. But we don't know this, and this is (I think) where Sageous makes total sense: how can we state that lucidity is an evolutionary intention when consciousness itself might just as well be an evolutionary byproduct of language? It makes much more sense that lucidity is a byproduct of the dreaming mechanism (a "glitch" if you may) then a trait for evolution. Why? Because children alone cannot possibly account for a trait that would make evolutionary sense: high lucid dream frequency would have to be present throughout the whole period of human life.
Besides that, we already know that lucid dreams happen spontaneously: join that to the initial characteristics of children that I posted in the first paragraph, and is it that special that so many children have lucid dreams? (and we're assuming this based on anecdotal evidence several of us presented, in a lucid dreaming forum)

You tell Sageous that it must be hard-wired and easy accessible, but then you create a much complex question: why would children loose that ability to lucid dream as they grow up? There are several other aspects to consider, but even then, evolutionary designed and hard-wired are completely different things: hard-wired meaning innate, meaning it would stick forever, and be present on everyone. Clearly we aren't hardwired.

I just realized I lost myself again: I wasn't meant to talk about this, but instead about what is lucidity xD I already posted this in another topic, but for the sake of everyone seeing it:

For THOLEY (1985) the following points have to be fulfilled to define a lucid dream: THOLEY compiled a list of prerequisite factors that have to be present to define a lucid dream:

Clarity (Klarheit) about the status of consciousness: Awareness that one is dreaming
Clarity (Klarheit) about the freedom of decision: The ability within the dream to choose a course of action...
Clarity (Klarheit) of consciousness, as opposed to a state of confusion
Clarity (Klarheit) about the waking life: about who you are and what, if any, your plans were for this dream
Clarity (Klarheit) of perception: what can be seen, heard, smelt, tasted or felt sometimes much more intense
Clarity (Klarheit) of recollection of the dream. You know, that you will remember this dream, that you can remember other dreams already dreamt while dreaming
Clarity (Klarheit) of meaning: You know, why you dream this dream and you know, what the (hidden) meaning is
The first four points of THOLEY’s definition of lucid dreaming is widely accepted whereas the last two points are open to discussion and often not accepted as absolute prerequisites.

For the definition of lucid dream like THOLEY introduced it, (1) to (7). For Stephen LaBERGE only (1) and (2) are required. (3) to (7) are more like features of this wonderful often quite ecstatic dream state (in German called “Klartraum” oder “luzider Traum”).

I'd agree with StephL on this one: lucidity is lucidity, knowing that you are in a dream provokes significant changes to your brain activity. But Sageous view get's me thinking: the definition of what a lucid dream is it's only that....a definition, and may not necessarily represent the phenomenon perfectly. Now playing a bit of semantics:

lucid: Mentally sound; sane or rational. readily understood; clear; psychiatry of or relating to a period of normality between periods of insane or irresponsible behaviour

Now, if we assume some of these common definitions, then lucid involves more than knowing you are dreaming: you can't be lucid if you can't think properly and rationally. If we take the literal translation of lucid dream "being aware that you are in a dream", then unconscious lucidity would be in the same category of higher-level lucidity (which would be really insulting indeed, because we're practically talking about radically different experiences). If "lucid dream" was coined after the "lucidity" that you experience in the waking life, then being aware that you are dreaming wouldn't cut it: we can't be considered "lucid" while hallucinating with LSD while knowing we are in the train hallucinating and not in disney land riding pluto, can we?
Hmmm now I'm undecided lol, unsure if we should stick to the traditional definition and go from there( so I'd agree with StephL because lucidity would just be another part of the spectrum of consciousness) or integrate lucidity as something that transcends the dream - after all, "lucid" was being used for waking life before it was used to describe a certain type of dream (in that case, I'd agree with Sageous completely). Back to work!

Very nice discussion guys ! I was not hoping to catalyze such a deep and broad debate with my questions, but i am glad you have all find an opportunity to do so. We have here a good piece of material to read and reflect. It would provide a good book, if i could have the copyright

I am not completely aware of all this thread's thoughts, so far, specially after it began to develop into more specific and detailed lines. I sometimes loose interest when my limited intelligence and curiosity can´t figure out immediate practical insights and applications.

I just want to add that of course there are degrees of lucidity as there are degrees of waking consciousness. And i also feel that all of us are aiming to achieve those highly lucid dreams. And i would add that, just as well, all of us would like to achieve a higher mastery of attention, mental stability, insight and so on.

If that high state of consciousness is available to us during the day, why do we loose that when we fall asleep ? That's something we can't accept . Is it a psychological habit or a physiological imperative ?

Now, some thoughts on children and LDing:


I think children can get high level lucid dreams, comparing to what is possible for them in waking life. I would add that children, much more than adults, have a smaller gap between their dreaming and waking minds. At least that´s how i remind my own child dreams, and that´s the feedback i get very often.

Of course their experience is different than ours, they don´t have complex self-actualization and transcendent goals, but as far as mundane goals and activities are concerned, i think we are not that different ( that's why we talk about our inner children, right ? ). We enjoy playing with our dog, just like when we were a child, or playing an instrument..

In absolute terms i think we adults have the potential to reach higher lucidity dreams in terms of complexity, insight, transcendence, and spiritual impact than children but i also believe that children end up reaching higher lucidity levels - not because of the complexity of the dream, but because it is more vivid and realistic. In short, they end up reaching their present dreaming potential more often, and without deliberate effort.

I think we as adults have a higher potential to reach, just because we have different interests and a more complex mind, but actually end up with more low quality lucid dreams. Children, i think, have much more consistent high quality dreams, just not so " interesting" in terms of content.


--> adults have more interesting dream contents and intentions, but not so much vividness. They have higher potential to explore, which means they have more levels to progress, if they want.

--> children have more vivid dreams, and more dream control abilities, dream more often, but their dream contents are not as much evolved. They reach their potential easily, without deliberate effort.

Originally Posted by VagalTone

If that high state of consciousness is available to us during the day, why do we loose that when we fall asleep ? That's something we can't accept . Is it a psychological habit or a physiological imperative ?

Well, you know how you can never remember the last minute before you fell asleep, most of your dreams, and some times that you woke up during the night. What if we never reach a level of 0 consciousness, we only reach a low level of consciousness and then, we also just don't stock the information in our long-term memory (not even the short one for that matter)?

At the same time, we all know that Lucid Dreaming is possible. It is possible to sleep and have a high level of consciousness. A low level of consciousness is therefore not a prerequisite of sleep. Some people even claim that they can be aware throughout their complete sleep period, although I am skeptical about that feat.

In that sense, a lowered consciousness during sleep is not a physiological imperative.

I am tempted to say it is a psychological habit, and perhaps a necessary one. We have very noisy minds, or at least I do. I think that as a whole, we have a lot going on in our heads and if we try to sleep while with a normal level of consciousness, we pay too much attention to our complex problem solving of what to do tomorrow, evaluating yesterday, etc... If we trained to clear our mind easily and simply focus on being, then maybe, we could enter sleep without being distracted by anything complex. Like a WILD.

I guess that means that I believe that getting a higher level consciousness is a habit, a habit of focusing your attention on certain ideas that create this feeling of higher consciousness. But to sleep and have a higher level consciousness we must be able to have a quiet mind, by focusing attention only on being for very long periods of time.

Originally Posted by VagalTone

--> adults have more interesting dream contents and intentions, but not so much vividness. They have higher potential to explore, which means they have more levels to progress, if they want.

--> children have more vivid dreams, and more dream control abilities, dream more often, but their dream contents are not as much evolved. They reach their potential easily, without deliberate effort.

Could children be more able to lucid dream because they have simpler minds and therefore more quiet minds which allow them to have a higher level of consciousness during sleep. And perhaps kids are more like animals which pay a lot of attention to the world. A child is very captivated by its surrounding while us as adults spend a lot of time studying abstract concepts and on the internet which does not require observance. Children, being more observant, have more vivid dreams.

Just throwing my own experience out there, I can well remember at a young age, 9 being the oldest age I recall experiencing this, I would find the feeling of self-awareness very strange. It made me feel so special and so confused at the same time. It was an explainable feeling, where I thought, if I only experience me, who experiences other people? For example, if you watch TV, you can only experience one person at once, and in this life, I was always only watching myself, making me feel as if I was the only conscious being in the world. This could of been when my self-awareness was developing which seems to me like I was quite old for that to be happening then...

Originally Posted by Occipitalred

Well, you know how you can never remember the last minute before you fell asleep, most of your dreams, and some times that you woke up during the night. What if we never reach a level of 0 consciousness, we only reach a low level of consciousness and then, we also just don't stock the information in our long-term memory (not even the short one for that matter)?

At the same time, we all know that Lucid Dreaming is possible. It is possible to sleep and have a high level of consciousness. A low level of consciousness is therefore not a prerequisite of sleep. Some people even claim that they can be aware throughout their complete sleep period, although I am skeptical about that feat.

That´s something that sleep yogis attain with training..If one gets that far then it´s possible to hold lucidity throughout the sleep cycle, but that´s a skill and may be lost.

I have read scattered reports of people achieving natural, spontaneous non-rem sleep awareness ( or lucidity ? ) though...

So, i don´t know, may be our sleep physiology could be very different now if we had counted sheep when we were children ?

So, in this regard, what is hardwired and what is learned ? what is the difference and relation between the two ? We may have some hardwired potential, but there is an environment which selects and guides what potential is developed.

So, i am more willing to say that we have the "hardwire" potential to lucid dream ( and may be lucid sleep ? ), but our environment ( including our permeated and culturally shaped mind ) is not conducive to its flourishing, quite the opposite.

That´s why i think we should look carefully at children, if we want to help them keep their potential an develop it further I bet it would be much more simple than it sounds..

In regards to the "evolutionary/hardwired" discussion, I don't understand what is meant. Evolution is only the way by which the next generation has mutations which makes it different from the previous generation and when a group is too different from the rest of the species due to these mutations, you've got yourself a new species. That's all that evolution is. So the question is, do our genes permit us to lucid dream. Well, obviously they do since we do it. Therefore I do not understand the confusion. Obviously, we are "meant" to lucid dream since we do, although are bodies are not meant to do anything at all (unless there is a higher power controlling evolution). Evolution, in its modern science definition, only talks of how we evolve randomly. Eyes are just random. They are not designed to see because they are not designed. They just happened to gradually become what they are now since species with eyes were more fit, although even that is not the only factors. If an accident had killed the species with eyes and random factors would have brought another species without eyes, then it would have happened. It's all just random. When we talk about today, whatever we can do is by definition possible and allowed by the genes that evolution gave us.

Originally Posted by VagalTone

That´s why i think we should look carefully at children, if we want to help them keep their potential an develop it further I bet it would be much more simple than it sounds..

I think it is a matter of keeping children interested in the outside world and help them focus their attention to their surroundings, as well as telling them about lucid dreaming and how to practice it so they know what they are doing. I just feel that with today's technology, kids are much more interested by video games, cellphones, and the internet to have a continuous attention for their surroundings.

This topic is getting confusing (probably our own fault :yumdumdoodledum: ), we already have at least 3 premises being discussed at the same time:

- Lucid dreaming induction;
- What is lucidity;
- Children and lucidity.

VagalTone, you made the thread, so should we follow your lead and straighten the conversation to the last premisse, or is this thread meant to discuss different components of lucidity? It's just so we don't derail your thread and scare people with the massive comments regarding different things (and I want to know so I can go look for my book on child development if we're talking about that xD)

Originally Posted by Sageous

....And by dismissing the fundamentals in favor of flashy techniques, machines, or drugs that just get you to the door and no further, you are building a new, locked, door in front of then open one.

Sorry to disappoint, Steph -- for some reason it really bothers me...

Well - if something brings me to the door - that realization - why does that build a new and closed one up in front of me?
If I gain lucidity with a certain alarm-device tuned to my REM cycles - I am as much there as the next person.
And can start the journey - with abilities - whatever they are.

Originally Posted by Zoth

On a small break at work so can't continue my previous post, but just wanted people to consider a small thing regarding this "what is lucidity" that StephL and Sageous are still discussing:

StephL, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if children had a much higher lucid dreaming frequency than most people expect: after all, they're forming brain connections at incredible rates, and unlike adults, at a huge development period when it comes to integrate experiences into their mental schemas.

It is actually not so, that they build up new connections and synapses - they get pruned down - we loose an enormous amount of them after birth - it is more a process of carving out the final pathways - like with a chisel. Oh where do I find the citations now - almost didn't mention it..

Originally Posted by Zoth

My question is:

What does that have to do with lucid dreaming being hard-wired into humans, or even being an evolutionary intention?

Nothing much - it is the prerequisite for the idea though - and Sageous was at the outset last page doubting, that there could be - lets better say soft-wired pathways for LDing in brains, which have not yet undergone specific or at least extensive other awareness practice.

Originally Posted by Zoth

You do make a compelling point regarding lucidity as a process that would arise in our evolutionary path, but you're assuming that lucidity is an evolutionary product of consciousness, which in itself would be another evolutionary product. But we don't know this, and this is (I think) where Sageous makes total sense: how can we state that lucidity is an evolutionary intention when consciousness itself might just as well be an evolutionary byproduct of language?

Really?
If you do attribute anything at all to evolution - why on earth not the mind?

Is is not what distinguishes us from all other animals - and is it not us, who have conquered this planet in almost all conceivable ways - who subjugate, use and kill all other life more or less at our leisure?

Why call exactly the biggest success story of any species on the planet not due to evolution - I really don't get it!
We are biological, or aren't we?
That again comes from wanting to have a need for a soul in the equation - why on earth else would you exclude the mind - a trait of living things - from the realm of evolution?
And why want to believe in a soul? For fear of death. Ultimately only for fear of death*.

Listen to the one hour plus/read the 9th chapter on consciousness in Nick Lane`s "Life Ascending - The Ten Great Inventions of Evolution" - you will change your mind there, I think.
*Death has chapter number ten devoted to it..

Originally Posted by Zoth

It makes much more sense that lucidity is a byproduct of the dreaming mechanism (a "glitch" if you may) then a trait for evolution. Why? Because children alone cannot possibly account for a trait that would make evolutionary sense: high lucid dream frequency would have to be present throughout the whole period of human life.

Yeah - I want to try to argue the case - I am not sure about the invention part - but I think, this argument of yours is not valid.
Especially in former times life-span was much shorter - and whom we view as children/kids today - where the ones doing the procreation to a significant degree.
But I actually came off it a bit - maybe it is just better to subsume LDing under the great invention of human consciousness and good is.
Shame - and I liked the idea so much..

Originally Posted by Zoth

... There are several other aspects to consider, but even then, evolutionary designed and hard-wired are completely different things: hard-wired meaning innate, meaning it would stick forever, and be present on everyone. Clearly we aren't hardwired.

Aahm - yes and no.
Being hardwired is maybe the wrong term - it came up to oppose the theory, that completely new wires would have to be connected for LD, and not just using ones, that are already there. Being there of course does not mean being static - that is not how the wiring works.

But you are right - being soft-wired so does in itself not say, that LD is a specific evolutionarily significant factor.
As opposed to just spill-over from human consciousness into the pre-existing animal-dreams.
And yeah - makes more sense - even to enthusiastic little me..
But who knows!
Arguing the case could bring forth a compendium of possible benefits - well - can be done for the mere fun of it, too..
Original ways to foster LD-wiring in the gene-pool or something..

Originally Posted by Zoth

Now, if we assume some of these common definitions, then lucid involves more than knowing you are dreaming:

you can't be lucid if you can't think properly and rationally.
If we take the literal translation of lucid dream "being aware that you are in a dream", then unconscious lucidity would be in the same category of higher-level lucidity (which would be really insulting indeed, because we're practically talking about radically different experiences).

No - being aware, that - means for me being aware of the fact that you are dreaming - and that of course includes knowing, what a dream is, and that there is waking life in contrast to that - where other laws are in power etc..
What you are getting at I would name - being aware in a dream - some sort of awareness is of course in all our dreams - otherwise no narratives.

Originally Posted by Zoth

If "lucid dream" was coined after the "lucidity" that you experience in the waking life, then being aware that you are dreaming wouldn't cut it: we can't be considered "lucid" while hallucinating with LSD while knowing we are in the train hallucinating and not in disney land riding pluto, can we?

It was coined after the German word Klartraum - and that is in itself seen as a bit unlucky in the German community**. Klar means clear, not lucid - we have "luzide" - but it was supposedly meant as a translation historically.
It was from the onset a rather poetical naming - playing on the connotations of clear.
**Into which I will foray a bit - strange I didn't already..

Originally Posted by Zoth

Hmmm now I'm undecided lol, unsure if we should stick to the traditional definition and go from there( so I'd agree with StephL because lucidity would just be another part of the spectrum of consciousness) or integrate lucidity as something that transcends the dream - after all, "lucid" was being used for waking life before it was used to describe a certain type of dream (in that case, I'd agree with Sageous completely). Back to work!

Well - no need for deep confusion here - it was not a god bound to name everything to it's true nature, who came up with the term - and neither a taxonomist - distorted in translation - is all.

I also wonder how to factor in the idea that a child's brain isn't finished growing yet? We know for instance that up to a certain age kids don't really understand ideas about right and wrong, they're just selfish egotistical want-machines. Surely a brain with an as-yet undeveloped cerebral cortex (the part responsible for advanced human-level thought setting us apart from the rest of the animals) doesn't act the same as a fully developed adult brain?

Since the premise that children LD just like adults seems to have been accepted without question, I think Darkmatters'earlier post bears repeating:

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

I also wonder how to factor in the idea that a child's brain isn't finished growing yet? We know for instance that up to a certain age kids don't really understand ideas about right and wrong, they're just selfish egotistical want-machines. Surely a brain with an as-yet undeveloped cerebral cortex (the part responsible for advanced human-level thought setting us apart from the rest of the animals) doesn't act the same as a fully developed adult brain?