Thread: Access to the subconscious??

Originally Posted by gigaschatten

There is no scientific proof that dreams are your individual, personal and meaningless (in a broader sense) imagination. That's how it is.

Is there any evidence to the contrary? I don't know why we should assume they are not our imaginations. Everything I've ever seen in my dreams leads me to believe it is just in my head. And its not like I'm closed minded about the subject, or am invested in it either way.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

Is there any evidence to the contrary?

It looks real, it feels real, it even smells real. There are people and when you talk to them, you'll realize they're not dumb. To say the least, they seem a lot more intelligent than the many species that are already extinct in our world because of our heedless behavior. It should take some real good and firm proof to say that is all just imagination.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

I don't know why we should assume they are not our imaginations.

And I don't see why we should. Do you have anything substantive to confirm your opinion?

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

Everything I've ever seen in my dreams leads me to believe it is just in my head.

Belief is not proof and it did enough wrong in the waking world already. Everything I've seen leads me to believe it's different, but very real.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

And its not like I'm closed minded about the subject, or am invested in it either way.

Good, then you'll see that until it is absolutely sure that dreams are just meaningless imaginations, one has to assume they're not and behave that way in order not to cause damage that might be very real until proven otherwise... which will never happen.

The simple fact that our bodies are laying in bed while we sleep is nearly enough to show that dreams are just from our imaginations. And, for the sake of argument, in order for dreams to be anything but our imaginations, they would have to take place somewhere other than on Earth. And every dream's setting is completely different. I understand your argument that until we prove anything, we can't assume anything to be true, but I don't see the substance and evidence from your P.O.V. either. To me, it just seems illogical that our dreams are 'real' and actually take place.

I mean, society basically accepts that our dreams are not real, since, after all, we don't leave our beds during our sleep. If you're going to say you believe they are real, you should really support that with something. It's a completely radical idea. Where, if not on Earth, do dreams take place? How can the settings of our dreams all be different? Why don't others remember what happened in our dreams if they were characters in our dreams? Why is it that we can feel our physical bodies during lucid dreams in light sleep? How is WILD'ing, transitioning from the waking state to a lucid dream without any lapse in consciousness, possible, if dreams take place in some other 'place'? Something, like a soul, within us would need to leave our bodies.

If religious beliefs are behind your ideas, I won't argue. I'm not religious, but arguing with religion is not only an argument that inevitably leads to no winner, but those arguments shouldn't bother to take place, anyway. I just want to hear the basis for your ideas, because I see no reason to think that we're exiting our physical bodies to some other reality during the night. I can't prove it...but I don't see why it should be suspected, or why it should be possible. The stages of sleep and dreaming are so well-documented, along with the science behind hallucinating, that the idea that dreams actually take place seems to just be coming out of nowhere, whereas the contrary, and more common belief that dreams are just our imagination, has much more reason and evidence behind it. Just because dreams seem as real as life does not mean they really are real. From your posts in this thread, you seem to understand science/psychology more than most of us...so I'm a bit bewildered by the fact that your actual ideas and beliefs about dreaming greatly defy science.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

The simple fact that our bodies are laying in bed while we sleep is nearly enough to show that dreams are just from our imaginations.

I don't see how that could show that dreams are imaginations.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

And, for the sake of argument, in order for dreams to be anything but our imaginations, they would have to take place somewhere other than on Earth. And every dream's setting is completely different.

Ah, come on. That's made up out of thin air.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

I understand your argument that until we prove anything, we can't assume anything to be true, but I don't see the substance and evidence from your P.O.V. either. To me, it just seems illogical that our dreams are 'real' and actually take place.

First, I don't need to prove my view. Respect for others demands us to act cautiously if there is the possibility our actions may cause harm.

Second, it is not illogical to assume dreams are real. Otherwise we would have a scientific proof. I think you wanted to say it does not feel right for you to accept the reality of dreams, but that is just your bias, not a fact.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

I mean, society basically accepts that our dreams are not real, since, after all, we don't leave our beds during our sleep.

You mean the body does not leave the bed. We are not our bodies though. And about society... it supports many obviously wrong and ill things. I guess I don't need to elaborate that.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

If you're going to say you believe they are real, you should really support that with something. It's a completely radical idea.

No, it isn't. And it's not a new idea. It may be radical for most westerners though, but we have been cut off from our spiritual roots anyway. We're materialists and being that, we are very poor people.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

Where, if not on Earth, do dreams take place?

Where? When? Does space even exist? Scientists today have accessed maybe 0.05 percent of what may be in our universe. The rest is not perceivable, not even with instruments. And that's what scientists say themselves. So basically we know next to nothing.

I don't know how the universe works, but I'm sure it works a lot different than we think it does today.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

How can the settings of our dreams all be different?

They aren't always different. Apart from that I cannot answer that. But I don't need to. I can just ask back how it comes that the setting in waking reality is always the same? You will not be able to answer that sufficiently too.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

Why don't others remember what happened in our dreams if they were characters in our dreams?

Because they weren't there. I met people I know or knew in my dreams. They weren't the same persons. They were made up, trying to imitate people I know. DCs can access your memory and they use it to get you involved in situations they create, for whatever reason. If you meet someone you think you know again, look closer.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

Why is it that we can feel our physical bodies during lucid dreams in light sleep?

Well, why is it consciousness can be in many places at the same time? I don't know, but I do know that it is possible. I've had various such experiences using entheogens.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

How is WILD'ing, transitioning from the waking state to a lucid dream without any lapse in consciousness, possible, if dreams take place in some other 'place'? Something, like a soul, within us would need to leave our bodies.

I don't know, but what if the spirit does not need time to reach places (assuming space exists) as the body does? Or is the body simply too restricted so it cannot perceive the layers of reality that exist at the same place and time? Read this: http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/~banchoff/Flatland/ It won't answer your question, but it'll show what I mean. A classic read.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

If religious beliefs are behind your ideas, I won't argue.

Actually no, my point of view relies on what is known and what is not known. As I said, we know next to nothing and that is not a secret. But somehow many people assume we have explained the universe already. We haven't and we probably will never understand.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

I'm not religious, but arguing with religion is not only an argument that inevitably leads to no winner, but those arguments shouldn't bother to take place, anyway. I just want to hear the basis for your ideas, because I see no reason to think that we're exiting our physical bodies to some other reality during the night. I can't prove it...

Exactly that's the point. You don't know.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

but I don't see why it should be suspected, or why it should be possible.

And I don't see why it should not be suspected or why it should be impossible. We both don't know and we both can neither prove nor disprove it.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

The stages of sleep and dreaming are so well-documented,

Nope, only externally measured brainpatterns are documented. It let's us assume a few things about the body, nothing else.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

along with the science behind hallucinating,

There are many hypotheses about that, but no hard facts. Did you know that most of the pharmaceuticals used today are just used because they are empirically known to work, yet it is unknown how they work. Probably you didn't know it. That's how it is though.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

that the idea that dreams actually take place seems to just be coming out of nowhere, whereas the contrary, and more common belief that dreams are just our imagination, has much more reason and evidence behind it.

Reason and evidence? Where? Can you give that to me? No, it's just the commonly accepted opinion, which does not prove its correctness. There were times when people thought that black people were not real humans, but half animals. So they put them into zoos or made them slaves. That was commonly accepted too, even by scientists.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

Just because dreams seem as real as life does not mean they really are real.

Well, but that's more evidence for their realness than against it, correct?

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

From your posts in this thread, you seem to understand science/psychology more than most of us...so I'm a bit bewildered by the fact that your actual ideas and beliefs about dreaming greatly defy science.

Defy science? Not really. Talk to a scientist who knows what he or she is doing and you'll see they are very humble people, because they know that what they know is really not much. And even the few things they know could be disproved another day. That happened many times and it will happen many more times.

Most people seem to mix up science with religion. They claim to have no religion, yet they base their view of the world on what they think science is. Remove every hypothesis, every speculation, everything that has not been proven and in relation - yes, I'm going to repeat myself - we know nothing. Even worse, wrong knowledge is less than nothing, because it is an obstruction on the way to knowledge you first have to overcome.

Knowing nothing, we have to assume everything is possible and because we are conscious beings capable of care and love, we must be cautious. Do we know that dreams are just imagination? No, we don't. Do we know the opposite? No, we don't. But is it possible that our actions in dreams can be harmful to other conscious beings? Yes, that is possible.

I see you've attempted to dissect every aspect of my message, respond to them, point out the inaccuracies, and further prove your point. I don't know how to pull out multiple, individual quotes from the messages, so I'll just copy and paste.

I said: And, for the sake of argument, in order for dreams to be anything but our imaginations, they would have to take place somewhere other than on Earth. And every dream's setting is completely different.

You responded: Ah, come on. That's made up out of thin air.

My response: Yes, out of thin air, but true. What I said was very non-specific and out of nowhere, but, true at the same time. I'm aware that something "not on Earth" doesn't necessarily make that thing impossible, but if dreams "took place" anywhere in the physical universe, Earth wouldn't be that place. Any non-physical place, not in our universe, would just be a guess.


I said: If you're going to say you believe they are real, you should really support that with something. It's a completely radical idea.

You responded: No, it isn't. And it's not a new idea. It may be radical for most westerners though, but we have been cut off from our spiritual roots anyway. We're materialists and being that, we are very poor people.

My response: My original point still holds true, here. OK, maybe it's only radical depending on who you are. But it's still just a guess. Though scientific evidence about sleeping and about hallucinations could be questioned by anyone, on the basis that so much of what we know to be science is likely wrong, there isn't evidence for the opposing P.O.V. either. But I'm not going to just throw science out the window. Yes, you may go on to tell me that science itself is just a guess on some level, but I've been along this route in debates before, and they take such a philosophical, impractical turn that we'd might as well be debating whether sheep can fly, if you know what I mean. Once you question science, and everything we've come to know, then I question why we're having this debate. Then, as far as I know, neither you nor I exist. All I'm saying is that if you're going to take nothing for granted on this extreme level (science --> nothing), then nobody's ideas are 'right'.


I said: Where, if not on Earth, do dreams take place?

You responded: Where? When? Does space even exist? Scientists today have accessed maybe 0.05 percent of what may be in our universe. The rest is not perceivable, not even with instruments. And that's what scientists say themselves. So basically we know next to nothing.

I don't know how the universe works, but I'm sure it works a lot different than we think it does today.

My reponse: Once again, I have to point out that when you question everything, suddenly no ideas can be correct, and your ideas, and your arguments, are suddenly no more or less valid than mine. I really want you to think about this...no matter who's right in this debate (and we may never know), we have to debate off of SOMETHING. By questioning everything we've accepted, there can't be a debate, because suddenly, our accepted, factual arguments have been dubbed "uncertain", along with everything else... so, I'd really prefer you didn't use that argument. Yeah, it might be right, and I won't deny that. But if it is, we have no right, ability, or knowledge to be having this debate, because suddenly everything, including this debate, means nothing, or something other than what we thought.


I said: How is WILD'ing, transitioning from the waking state to a lucid dream without any lapse in consciousness, possible, if dreams take place in some other 'place'? Something, like a soul, within us would need to leave our bodies.

You responded: I don't know, but what if the spirit does not need time to reach places (assuming space exists) as the body does? Or is the body simply too restricted so it cannot perceive the layers of reality that exist at the same place and time? Read this: http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/~banchoff/Flatland/ It won't answer your question, but it'll show what I mean. A classic read.

My response: Again, this is just a guess. You wouldn't be wrong to say I'm guessing on some level as well, but again, I've got to refer to my previous responses. When you get this deep, and start theorizing things like this without the evidence, the debate isn't any longer working with things we know. We may not 'know' science, but it's established enough that I will feel confident right now saying that it isn't entirely wrong, either. It's the only thing either of us truly have as a basis for this debate, honestly.


I said: but I don't see why it should be suspected, or why it should be possible.

You responded: And I don't see why it should not be suspected or why it should be impossible. We both don't know and we both can neither prove nor disprove it.

My response: Well, I still view your ideas as fairly out of the blue, while typical ideas about dreams are backed up by science, for good or for bad. On some level, human ideas about science, for the most part, are probably right. It's just that there's probably a ton more to it than we could imagine right now.
I do see why it should be suspected, unless you truly do intend to undermine all scientific research conducted by humans...ever. As I said, science is probably accurate, at the least, on some shallow level. The science of sleep and of dreaming wouldn't be 100% incorrect. If anything, it's just telling the very shallow part of the story of what's really going on in our brains in this vast, undiscovered universe. I do feel that I'm speaking objectively by saying that your ideas (I don't have anything personally against your ideas, I'm just saying) are more of guesses than mine, right now. Don't respond philisophically to this - from all we can tell, that is just the case. And if you do want to accuse science of being entirely wrong, then I'll accuse you of being able to breathe fire, which should be impossible. Debates like this do have their limitations. At a certain point, you can't have an objective debate if too much is in question. With that in mind, I'm making my statement that your ideas do, at least to me, seem more guess-like than mine, and that is why I'm questioning why you would, anyway, suspect what you do believe.


I said: Just because dreams seem as real as life does not mean they really are real.

You responded: Well, but that's more evidence for their realness than against it, correct?

My response: Well, by default, the existence of dreaming could not count against the possibility that they are real. That's a given.


I do have one more question, assuming you'll probably respond to most of the other things I said...I still don't know why you DO believe in what you think. Why DO you think dreams are real, and not what science has led us to believe, after all? Believing that to be true is more than just saying it's possible. It's possible I might grow wings and fly to school tomorrow. Physically, there is a non-zero chance of that happening. Except, it's like a 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance. So, why do you think dreams are real, and that the common belief that they're in your head is wrong?

Oh wow there have been a lot of responses recently that I hadn't seen when I posted my last response. Yeah. My last message was responding to gigaschatten. I don't know what to say. I've never seen a thread with so many long messages in it.

Originally Posted by baseballmk92

I've never seen a thread with so many long messages in it.

you serious? ... haha noob!

...

I kid, I kid

Someone in this thread reminds me of my son when he argues!
He argues in circles, trying to derail and confuse, and never gives
a definitive answer.

Robot Butler, I'm with you in your thinking, and with anyone who
can draw a line in between reality, dreams and fantasy. Which is
just about everyone!

I read the advanced tasks of ppl asking themselves why they dream,
and some of the answers were truly awesome!