Thread: Everyone has Lucids...

Everytime I see the title of this thread pop up, I'm reminded of my niece's potty training book.

Originally Posted by O'nus

It's hard to follow through the rebuttals and probably worth re-iterating anyway.

~

No it isn't. This is worse than the time I had an argument with my Dad about when the cricket year begins.

I think that some people who are reading this thread are misunderstanding what it's trying to say.

Most people do at least two or three LDs within their lifetimes by random coincidence. I think that when some people look at this thread, they assume that it means everyone lucid dreams FREQUENTLY. It doesn't. I can honestly say that I have LDs before I knew about this site. But the thing is, I only remember, like, two within the entire 15 years before I joined. Every time I tell someone what a lucid dream is, 90% of the people say, "I've had one of those before!" but I only know one person who is a natural. I beleive that within a good life of 70+ years, everyone has had at least ONE lucid, but probably doesn't remember it. The probability of not having an LD within 70 years, even by random coincidence, is about 102,272 to 1... Even less if that person has had a reocurring dream, or DEILDed by accident (I've done that before). I'm sure that there's that 1 out of 102,272 people who doesn't, but in general, just about everyone lucid dreams SOMETIMES.

Originally Posted by O'nus

Oneiro, I'm just curious, could you summarise your key arguments or purports for those who are trying to grasp the crux of this debate, like myself? It's hard to follow..

You amaze me.. I thought it was obvious.. but.. okay..fair enough.

Hmmmm.. let me think.. okay:

"Don't believe the hype."

That just about says it, I think.

And CloD? Notwithstanding your PMed threats to myself, I note with resignation that you didn't answer my question.

Just what exactly was your point?

Originally Posted by Mini Man56

I think that some people who are reading this thread are misunderstanding what it's trying to say.

Most people do at least two or three LDs within their lifetimes by random coincidence. I think that when some people look at this thread, they assume that it means everyone lucid dreams FREQUENTLY. It doesn't. I can honestly say that I have LDs before I knew about this site. But the thing is, I only remember, like, two within the entire 15 years before I joined. Every time I tell someone what a lucid dream is, 90% of the people say, "I've had one of those before!" but I only know one person who is a natural. I beleive that within a good life of 70+ years, everyone has had at least ONE lucid, but probably doesn't remember it. The probability of not having an LD within 70 years, even by random coincidence, is about 102,272 to 1... Even less if that person has had a reocurring dream, or DEILDed by accident (I've done that before). I'm sure that there's that 1 out of 102,272 people who doesn't, but in general, just about everyone lucid dreams SOMETIMES.

No, that's exactly how I interpreted the original post - pure speculation without any evidence. You have provided one piece of anecdotal evidence, but it is the opposite of my own experience. I'm very curious to know how you managed to define a probability for your contention (actually not really).

Originally Posted by paragon

No, that's exactly how I interpreted the original post - pure speculation without any evidence. You have provided one piece of anecdotal evidence, but it is the opposite of my own experience. I'm very curious to know how you managed to define a probability for your contention (actually not really).

Meh... The probability probably isn't that accurate...

I just took 365 days a year times 70, then factored in leap year, then multiplied it by an average of four dreams per night. You have a chance for a lucid in every dream... So yeah... 102,272.

But wait! I forgot to count naps! xP

Originally Posted by paragon

No, that's exactly how I interpreted the original post - pure speculation without any evidence.

Tread carefully paragon.. you're on eggshells here. You know about "Dad's Army"?

"They don't like it up 'em, Mr. Mainwaring!"

Ever been banned? Well.. try not to give 'em any excuse to ban you.. not that that will stop 'em if you really get up their noses by daring to question their own status quo..

Just realise that some mods here are extremely full of their own self-importance.. so be aware.

Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Mini Man56

Most people do at least two or three LDs within their lifetimes by random coincidence. I think that when some people look at this thread, they assume that it means everyone lucid dreams FREQUENTLY. It doesn't. I can honestly say that I have LDs before I knew about this site. But the thing is, I only remember, like, two within the entire 15 years before I joined. Every time I tell someone what a lucid dream is, 90% of the people say, "I've had one of those before!" but I only know one person who is a natural. I beleive that within a good life of 70+ years, everyone has had at least ONE lucid, but probably doesn't remember it. The probability of not having an LD within 70 years, even by random coincidence, is about 102,272 to 1... Even less if that person has had a reocurring dream, or DEILDed by accident (I've done that before). I'm sure that there's that 1 out of 102,272 people who doesn't, but in general, just about everyone lucid dreams SOMETIMES.

I agree with this. I personally believe that everyone has probably had an LD in their lifetime but most don't remember it. Want proof? I can't really give you any, its my own opinion

No, I don't think everyone has had a LD in their life... why? Because there is babys who die before having their first dream (after being born) and I count these in the "everyone" lol
Then again, chances is most of humans actually get one or more, but with chances, it is so relative.

Also, oneiro, I would suggest not to do what you tell others not to do. (Say unsopported things, for example)

Originally Posted by Oneiro

And CloD? Notwithstanding your PMed threats to myself, I note with resignation that you didn't answer my question.

Just what exactly was your point?

Originally Posted by ClouD

The entire point was that what you're saying about validity of naturals isn't justified, because lucidity is a subjective experience, and that the definition itself isn't always applicable. I applied that towards my own experiences and explained it.

And those PMs weren't threats, they were ofishoil warnings for trolling.

Ignoring the replies to your questions with 'resignation'? More disinformation tactics and asshattery?

Originally Posted by Oneiro

You amaze me.. I thought it was obvious.. but.. okay..fair enough.

Hmmmm.. let me think.. okay:

"Don't believe the hype."

That just about says it, I think.

You're not saying what hype or why. Anecdotal reasoning is nothing at face-value. Although the reasoning may seem intuitive to you, it's good to supply it. Otherwise, it is a sweeping unsupported claim.

~

Originally Posted by Oneiro

"Don't believe the hype."

Originally Posted by O'nus

You're not saying what hype or why. Anecdotal reasoning is nothing at face-value. Although the reasoning may seem intuitive to you, it's good to supply it. Otherwise, it is a sweeping unsupported claim.

O'nus.. I can't believe that you're actually as big a moron as you appear.

Did you not read my post(s) where I broke down what I felt were the "hype" statements? And then gave my reasoning behind it, and some of my personal experience thereof? You spot any "intuition" there? I certainly don't.

Do you know what the word "hype" means? The etymology? It comes from "hyperbole" which means "exaggeration for effect". It's all over this site IMO. Probably an age thing IMO. Believe you me, people do it less-and-less as they get older and more experienced IMO.

Now.. where's that CloD?

Originally Posted by CloD

The entire point was that what you're saying about validity of naturals isn't justified, because lucidity is a subjective experience..

So.. by your same reasoning, the pronouncements of such "naturals" must also be invalid... indeed, by that same reasoning, anything anyone ever says about LDing must ergo be invalid.

Which is what I was saying all the time.. "don't believe the hype" IMO.

Get out of that one without moving.

Originally Posted by CloD

And those PMs weren't threats, they were ofishoil warnings for trolling.

Pathetic. Implicit in such a "warning" is a threat of some form of punishment. Threats they most certainly are.. but.. do your worst, if it'll assuage your ego.

Originally Posted by CloD

Ignoring the replies to your questions with 'resignation'? More disinformation tactics and asshattery?

Well.. you had to be prompted to clarify your point, didn't you? If I'd said nothing, you wouldn't have replied to my question.

And.. "disinformation tactics". Are you kidding? My whole diatribe was completely anti-disinformation. Makes me wonder, I have to say, if you actually bothered to read properly what I wrote. Maybe you were too busy flexing your PM-threat muscles?

BTW I've left a little joke for you in the jokes thread as a parting gift. Enjoy.

Ta-ta.

Originally Posted by Oneiro

May I paraphrase, to make my own comment?

You have read some accounts about self-proclaimed "naturals" on here, though, who claim to have great dream control.. even before they claim to have found out what it was.. but then there's always the "Validity Quotient" to take into account.

Ok, according to that, you must provide the proof of you being 53 and the proof of these experiences being true. Because, of course, if there is no "Validity Quotient" from other posters or people who share experiences, there is none from you, either, and therefore you may be one of these young liars.

The hype? That is the very same thing you're doing while posting, putting hype on lies that may or may not exist, and we have no way of knowing in an internet forum.

Oh and don't forget the hype on how evil mods are <.< (Even if you use the IMO, it is hype)

Since you people can't have conversations without attacking and insulting each other.

If you are interested in this thread being reopened, and are willing to promise not to personally attack one another and just discuss your ideas, PM me.

I've reopened the thread. Unless you guys can behave in an appropriate manner, it will be re-locked. Please conduct yourselves properly, it's really not that hard to have a discussion without descending into pettiness and insults.