Are we considered oneirologists?

[slayer]

oneirologist: One who studies dreams oneironaut: one who travels through dream worlds and/or explores alternate realities. I know that we would be considered oneironaunts, but are we also considered oneirologists? I'm not saying that everyone here would be considered oneirologists, but there are some of us who research different types of Lucid Dreaming. Some of us has to figure what we can do best to help us dream more. Wouldn't that be consirdered something similar to studying a dream, as we are trying to find out what makes our dreams more vivid, or whatever? I would like to be called an oneirologist, because if I meet someone who has troubles with dreams, I would like to sound professional and actually know what I'm talking about, instead of some random guy going "Oh you need to do this to achieve this in your dream..." That can be viewed as either good, or bad, but I wouldn't lie to someone, if I didn't know something, I would tell them I didn't, but still give them tips or things they can try out. So, are some of us here considered oneirologists?

[shrimpster]

I'm not personally a oneironologist but seeing as this is a forum based around Lucid Dreaming (and partially dreaming in general) I expect that anyone here who has a rather deep interest in Lucid Dreaming and the techniques used to induce it (and other things relating to dreams i.e. SP, dream incubation, etc) could definitely be labeled as an oneironologist. :3 Also, the term Onerionologist can probably be used on yourself, slayer, if you do have a deep knowledge of dreaming and an interest in it.

[m3thart]

I suppose many of us could consider ourselves to be oneirologists, but I think it's more of a formal title to describe a career.

[Shift]

I say, emphatically, no, but mostly because a LOT of what I read on Dream Views isn't scientific in the slightest, and a lot of the people writing on Dream Views don't have accurate ideas of what makes science science. I would call an oneirologist someone who is doing actual research or studying the in-depth science behind sleep in a scientific and controlled manner, not someone reporting anecdotal support of a theory. Someone who studies the neurology, the cognitive models and implications, etc., with a specific focus on dreams, not just a breezy basic overview. I guess if I was going to use an analogy it would be this. Say you are a total druggie, and just heard about drug A on wikipedia or from a friend. Using too much of drug A will result in you just zonking out, and using too little drug A with not be enough to get you a trip. So you sit around exploring with drug A until you find the perfect balance, and the proper method of ingestion to get a huge hallucinogenic trip (it could be snorted, injected, eaten, whatever). Now say that you are a scientist, a biochemist who has a PhD and has spent years studying molecular biology and chemistry and botany and etc. And you are in your laboratory, studying how the drug works, its structure, its effects on different species, the possible medical implications such a drug could have, etc. This of course isn't a perfect analogy, because the chemicals are playing a more defined role in this trip than induction methods do for a lucid dream. This is like someone who was en English major in college, but who took a gen. biology class and then decided they want to become a doctor. When it comes to applying to graduate school, they write that they are a biologist, because it makes them sound more important and official than they actually are. The sad thing, is that in this gen. bio class this person learned more about biology than most of us will ever learn about the science of dreaming, simply because relatively little is actually known. But they are still far from a biologist, and trained biologists are going to laugh and realize what an idiot this kid is. Everyone else is going to be a little confused about exactly how legitimate he is, because just because he knows a little bit about something, doesn't make him an expert or a scientist. So to answer your question, I'd say no. I think a few of the members who have been trained in the sciences, and probably have a lot of psychology under their belts, could be considered oneirologists if they actually understand the majority of the little science there is behind lucid dreaming, and dreaming in general. But for the rest of us, to call us oneirologists.... Lucid dreaming has enough of a problem as being seen as a legitimate, normal, scientific, real phenomenon without a bunch of highschoolers running around claiming to be expert scientists in dreaming because they managed a DILD last night. Even those of us who are older, even those of us who are trained in the sciences, I don't think are warranted to make such claims unless we have a seriously good base of the scientific knowledge of dreaming. Most of us are not scientists. We're just practitioners and fans.. As much as I would love to run around giving myself such a title, I respect lucid dreaming, scientists, science, and myself too much to do such a thing.

[spaceexplorer]

Couldn't have said it better than Shift.

[Iamerik]

Very well put Shift.

[slayer]

That was a great answer Shift. Thanks for the reply.

[juroara]

you are horrible! with your sexy dream avatar! it should be banned! >:0 he's far too sexy for anyone to have him! anyways, I understand what you mean about the scientific research. that science is important, but it's not the whole picture, or even the whole story. the problem with that particular field of science is, it completely ignores the first hand experience as 1. testimony. as 2. something to investigate ON ITS OWN. how can you study dreams, if you only look at the functions that create the dream, and not the dream itself? the problem is western science doesn't even seem to think the dream itself is really worth investigating anymore. who here has gotten the snide remarks from others that lucid dreaming is nothing but juvenile escapism with no relation to real life? your just 'weird' for suggesting it has any meaning or worth looking into. the science of the dream is like the science of how a building is constructed. with no mention of either the architect, the history of architecture, its architecture in relation to contemporary culture, and why the architect designed it so! so you know how the building was built. great, and? for the oneirologist to have a holistic approach to studying dreams, it would incorporate a lot of studies other than the scientific method. but to really study the dream? is to study your own head. your own thoughts. your own fears. your own joys. your own self!! its more psychology than neurons. but who can know you better than yourself? Im not saying this makes the casual lucid dreamer, a oneirologist, far from it. but certainly, a real avid oneironaut is a real oneirologist in his/her own right. and does have a better understanding of the dream as a whole, than someone who only sees brain signals. who are the best oneirologists? tibetan dream yogis! thats my argument at least.

[spaceexplorer]

Im not saying this makes the casual lucid dreamer, a oneirologist, far from it. but certainly, a real avid oneironaut is a real oneirologist in his/her own right. and does have a better understanding of the dream as a whole, than someone who only sees brain signals. who are the best oneirologists? tibetan dream yogis! thats my argument at least. Not really, because you are using a scientific term. Who are the best Oneirologists? Those with a degree and training in Oneiriology. Is someone who guts fish a marine biologist? no. Tibetan Dream yogis are... Tibetan Dream Yogis. Lets just use the term Oneironaut and be happy with it. It's just a word. What we're doing is personal exploration, lets just enjoy it and stop trying to make ourselves sound important.

[dreamscaper22]

well put shift...i wouldnt consider this oneironology

[reesespieces]

yeah i believe that we are oneironauts from the literal definition

[slayer]

How do you even pronounce Oneironauts?

[Shift]

How do you even pronounce Oneironauts? Stephen LaBerge says in EWOLD: Since Lucid Dreaming, my research team has continued its laboratory work at Stanford University, mapping mind/body relationships during the dream state and, in Courses and workshops with volunteer oneironauts (pronounced oh-NIGH-ro-knots, meaning "explorers of the dream world"), studying techniques for inducing, prolonging, and using lucid dreams. Oh-neigh-row-knot Of course there have been debates on here before, and people argue that because of their accents (ie british vs american) that it is pronounced a number of different ways. I stand by: LaBerge is American, he coined the term, that's traditionally how you say the parts that make up the term... so that's how it goes lol

[Bonsay]

but to really study the dream? is to study your own head. your own thoughts. your own fears. your own joys. your own self!! its more psychology than neurons. but who can know you better than yourself? Well, if you use scientific methods then you can study dreams. Collect different dream content from different people, compare results, use MRI scans, look at brainwaves, muscle twitches, create experiments... You can obviously only use introspection for dream content studies, but how else will you study this phenomenon. Laberge couldn't have proven LDing without proper scientific evidence. If you check the articles on the Lucidity Institute website, you can probably see what oneirologists do.

[Shift]

It's also about dreams in general, sleep cycles, etc.... oneirology is not limited to lucid dreaming only.

[Bonsay]

It's also about dreams in general, sleep cycles, etc.... oneirology is not limited to lucid dreaming only. Of course. It was just the only actual "thing" I remembered or saw related to oneirology.

[slayer]

Ok so if someone were to ask us something about a dream or whatever. we could tell them that were an Oneironaut?

[Bonsay]

Well beside astro/cosmonauts, I rarely hear of any other -naut. So you could say so if you really want to. Maybe it would be fair if you were as much into dreaming as an astronaut is into space . And "we" are oneironauts not an oneironaut.

[Shift]

You could just tell them something without labeling yourself. Which is what I would do because there is no reason whatsoever to label yourself. Then if the person seems to be into what you are saying, you could go on and discuss why you feel qualified to dish out dreaming advice. Honestly if someone offered me advice and said, "It's ok, I'm qualified: I'm an oneirologist." I'd probably laugh (in the bad way) or throw up on them or something. You can call yourself whatever you want to make yourself feel good. The person you are talking to is gonna have no idea what you are saying either way. Whether you want to use an accurate term, or an inaccurate one, is up to you. As much as I'd like to hunt down people who lie and exaggerate and make LDing hard to swallow by the public, I can't. So go for it, call yourself whatever you want. You're not an oneirologist, you could be considered an oneironaut, and if you really wanted to stretch it but not be flat out lying (in the way that someone who watches a documentary on national geographic could call themselves an amateur zoologist) you could probably get away with "amateur oneirologist" (fair warning though, if I ever hear someone say this I'm going to beat them up just for being an absolute moron). Just go for it. I can call myself the pope, but you are going to judge me based on what I bring to the table. So what you call yourself doesn't matter. Representing yourself in a logical and intelligent manner will outshine the title, especially when the title is meaningless (especially to the layman) anyway.

[capoopy]

Id call myself an oneironaut just to make myself look like some crazy awesome scientist Also, ive always pronounced it Oh-neer-oh-naut, why didnt he pick something easier to say like dreamologist, or deathologist (which, even though it sounds like someone who studies dead stuff, it would sound freakin awesome) "Im a deathologist" "Whoa"

[Shift]

Id call myself an oneironaut just to make myself look like some crazy awesome scientist Also, ive always pronounced it Oh-neer-oh-naut, why didnt he pick something easier to say like dreamologist, or deathologist (which, even though it sounds like someone who studies dead stuff, it would sound freakin awesome) "Im a deathologist" "Whoa" Your entire response is the problem inherent in the OP. Except for maybe the way you pronounce "oneironaut" "I'm a deathologist." "Whoa, this guys a fucking retard. Best steer clear of him, everything he says is surely some sort of new-age-demonologist bs that we shouldn't even waste our time listening to or considering." I guess if you were a mortician or forensic scientist you MAY be able to call yourself a deathologist.

[slayer]

I guess it would really only be a good time to tell them if they asked us how we know so much about dreaming.

[spaceexplorer]

I guess it would really only be a good time to tell them if they asked us how we know so much about dreaming. I'm not sure i follow your logic on that. Bear in mind that virtually no one other than people who frequent these sorts of forums or who have read LaBerge will know what an Oneironaut is. So if someone says "how much do you know about dreaming?" and you say "Oh, well i'm an Oneironaut"... it's going to mean absolutely nothing to them, so you are going to have to explain what the term means, which lets face it, is exactly the same as just answering their question only the latter is in a less pretentious and more direct way. I'd only ever use the term if i was in a dreamgroup and we all wanted to motivate ourselves by feeling like explorers of the dream world. It would work in that contex because everyone is in the same boat. Even so, i still find needless lables to be pretentious and arrogant. If someone asks me how much i know about dreams, i just tell them how long i've been studying the subject and how enthusiastic i am about it. There is no need to make ourselves feel superior to others by trying to give ourselves titles. Treat people as equals, and who knows you may learn something that you'd not learn inside the insular world of lucid dreaming forums. Sometimes it takes detachment from a subject to give unusual or unique insights into them. Keep an open, humble mind, and treat others with respect and as equals. Lables create divisions where there need be none.

[Shift]

[Abra]

I introduce it as a hobby. If they want to hear more, I reveal it more as a side-project. I don't think I'd study the dream itself. I'd be more interested in studying the mechanisms behind dreaming, with the ultimate goal of developing technology that would give more insight as to what goes behind the lids. Think about it: people are currently constructing implants that give the blind (blinded by accident, not from birth) partial sight. What if we made something that could reverse it, letting us see and record what they see? Not much practical use (unless psychoanalysis suddenly becomes popular). It would be more of an art form for those who can't draw. Or, developing methods (or technology) that reliably increases the rate of lucidity. Something everyone could use. This would be loads more practical and cost-effective than developing virtual reality. I'd want it to be used first in therapy (many kinds of therapy would work here. Phobias could be eased, it could be used in counseling, maybe as a treatment for obesity, and even the learning/re-learning of skills by disabled/injured people). Study dreams? No, I don't study them. I enjoy them. I want to study the mechanisms, so that we can improve the probability that others can enjoy them, too (especially those who need it!).