The one base rule for lucidity

Ok well i am very interested in this topic but i am only young and i don't think i know the proper meaning of the word Placebo is it:

Placebo:
Does this mean that you have to trick your mind into thinking something will work when it could be completely made up? e.g I have a headache and a docter gives me a pill and says this will fix it, so i take it and my headache goes away and the pill could of had nothing to do with it only that i thought it would. (Or something like that? hard to explain for me).

Also i heard someone above me mention about the Logic center falling asleep, so if we can somehow train the brain to keep the logic center awake while we fall asleep would it be much easier to LD? like as soon as something doesn't make sence we could say, well thats not right and become Lucid? Well we could try to have a rough day of maths or something and maybe the brain will think more logical in dreams? (don't think this will work but im just throwing things around).

Would really like to read more into this, oh and also sorry if i mix up "unconcious" and "sub-concious" its starting to confuse me with this debate :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcanumNoctis

Word Origin & History

subconscious:
"1823, "not wholly conscious" (implied in subconsciously), from sub- + conscious. First attested in De Quincey. The noun, in the psychological sense, is attested from 1886; earlier subconsciousness (1874)."

Roughly 100-130 years old is why some people consider it new age. That is not too long after "Psychology" was founded. It is used in the psychological sense, which logically it's origin is from Psychology.

---

So, because we can confirm Pierre Janet used the term 130 years ago it's immediately a good term to use? I'm going to coin the term sur-conscious right now, this very moment. It means "above conscious". It still doesn't mean shit, but it exists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tosxychor

About the "subconscious" discussion - I agree with arby, in a way.
Subconscious is indeed a word that has been used by various groups, with somewhat different meanings - the "New Age BS" arby was referring to has to do with Law of Attraction and similar, that consider the Subconscious a powerful, separate entity from the Conscious.
That is probably a level arby didn't want to take the dialogue to, and so it is better to use the word unconscious, just to avoid misunderstandings of sort.

---

Yeah, It's used to mean a separate "magical" entity more commonly than any scientifically backed model. This is why it's normally never used when seriously talking about how your mind works. Usually people will think you're talking about the magical separate entity that is good at everything etc. (half the time I see the word sub-conscious, it's no more then 2 sentences away from "unlock the real potential of your mind", "unlock hidden powers" or similar)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tosxychor

Besides, about the whole perfectioning discussion, I believed too there would be limits to LDing, but I've seen too much to still stand by that point. There are people who are lucid every night, and more than so, have forgotten what a non-lucid is, since years ago. A namely example would be Writerscube. But there's even more that that.
Some Dream Yoga monks have perfected their control over dreams, that they are lucid while awake too. There are Nagual shamans who are dreaming while awake.
I can't sadly bring evidence to this, because I forgot the sources, but that's completely out the point I'd like to make.

The real point is, whenever I thought some level of skills would be the non-plus-ultra, I read of someone who had gone well past that. So I'm asking a question, what's the point of putting limits in front of yourself in the first place? To hamper yourself in your possible achievements?
Who has the right to say where perfection stands? We have started to explore the Lucid Dreaming world systematically only recently, so any limit we put in front of ourselves cannot be confirmed yet, thus there's no real reason to put it in the first place, is it? If one wants to go as far as (s)he can, (s)he has only to give his/her best, and see where one ends up.

---

Anyway, enough off-topic sub-conscious discussion. Never have I said that lucidity is an unlearnable skill if it is based in the unconscious. It is feasible to say that you could develop a technique that would work for yourself 100% of the time. It could be as dumb as "I rub my ears as I fall asleep and this triggers me to stay aware as I fall asleep". Human learning, especially hebbian learning is crazy enough that this is actually entirely possible (abeit, random)

I think the point of this topic is being missed slightly =/ It's partially my fault for not explaining fully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterHyde

I fall into this category too. I have always been able to Lucid. I've never used any techniques, it's just been an ability of mine. So how does the theory of it being an unconscious thing? If until maybe 15 years ago I didn't even have a name for this thing but knew about it and could do it, how could that be anything other than something which exists in everyone? And there are other naturals out there, so I am hardly an exception.

What I would say is that perhaps this is along the right lines for people who aren't natural. Perhaps the process of the thought of being lucid being lodged in the unconscious triggers or trips something.

---

Natural lucids seem to fall into the area of [unconscious actions -> lucidity] which falls entirely into the scope of this theory. It shows that it IS possible to become lucid without conscious thoughts on the matter (but doesn't say anything about the existence of conscious induction)

Yup, a placebo is something which does nothing, but has an effect on the person anyway.

And as for the day of maths idea, not such a bad idea. What we do during the day definetly influences dreams. I was on Dream Views before I went to bed and had a very internet themed lucid.

Arby, what implication does this hav for dream yoga and meditation and autosuggestion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterHyde

Yup, a placebo is something which does nothing, but has an effect on the person anyway.

And as for the day of maths idea, not such a bad idea. What we do during the day definitely influences dreams. I was on Dream Views before I went to bed and had a very internet themed lucid.

---

This sounds about the same for me, i was on dreamviews for a long time on one of my days off and i had a dream about going on this very website and i didn't realize it was a dream??? haha

So yer maybe if we try different methods to keeping our logic center active....
Maybe it cuts out when we sleep because it needs a rest?? Think about it we use maths every day, whether its its basic maths or advanced we still use it?

Well it sounds difficult, maybe near impossible? just something to experiment with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arby

I never said any one person would ever actually be able to induce lucidity consciously (if there were such a way). Instead, such a way would be technically possible even if it were never properly achieved perfectly in practice (I could say that it's possible for me to remember pi to a million decimal places, but I'll never do it because it's sufficiently "hard"). I agree that if there exists a fully conscious method, it is very hard and doubtful it can be perfected to the extent that you could (in practice) do it on demand without fail.

---

Ah, ok. I understand your PoV better, now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arby

So, because we can confirm Pierre Janet used the term 130 years ago it's immediately a good term to use? I'm going to coin the term sur-conscious right now, this very moment. It means "above conscious". It still doesn't mean shit, but it exists.

---

I agree that we should get off the whole unconscious/subconscious thing, but I couldn't go without saying two things:

1. The analogy you gave with "sur-conscious" is not the same thing, at all. As you said, yourself, it doesn't mean shit. "Sub-conscious" actually does, but it happens to have more than one usage.

2. Whether or not it's used in one context more than another doesn't mean the word is invalid, in the lesser context. The word is still valid and, given the psychological nature of the topic, it's pretty apparent that people will know what you mean by, "subconscious." That there is a debate about whether or not the word can be used in the thread, is kinda silly.

That being said...carry on, everyone!

THEORUM:

"Your conscious actions do not have direct impact on your attainment of lucidity."

I will argue this one. If one were to attain permanent awareness throughout the day, the same would happen within the dream. So making the conscious choice to stay aware has a direct impact on the attainment of lucidity. Same goes for RC's which are practically born from the same concept.

"They only effect it indirectly. The true underlying foundations for lucidity are found EXCLUSIVELY in unconscious action or learned behavior, which are often triggered by your conscious activity (in a technique, etc.)"

The learned behavior part is interesting. Most naturals somehow learned to do this and they don't realize how exactly. This may or may not be related to the method I spoke of above. Once one learns to be aware, they typically don't lose clarity in their dreams from then on. During the process, there begins to develop a distinct and keen understanding of the differences between dreams and waking life that was cultivated through mindfulness, and this is never lost. As Oneironaut mentioned: "When you learn to play an instrument, getting more proficient has much less to do with "thinking" about everything you're doing. It comes with muscle-memory, and other subconscious/unconscious actions." The same applies for what I am speaking of. Once learned, less thinking is involved (no pun intended), and the practitioner has the choice to stop mindfulness but still reap the rewards of their cultivated practice in dreams. The amount of time needed to be fully aware depends on the person entirely. (Thanks Iro, it reminded me of this.)

As far as perfection goes... I have experience with this. Being an obsessive perfectionist (not fun or good), I am learning to let go of it - albeit slowly. Honestly I think Merely said it best... There will always be room for error on a humans part. It's what makes life more than dull. Maybe not always fun, but not boring. It is undeniable fact that no matter what you do, you will always bite your tongue, or stumble when walking, or stub your toe on the same dresser you've had for 20 years... I don't know why we are imperfect, but we are. Perhaps it was written in our code so that we don't end up committing suicide... Thus there is absolutely no technique out there that will allow you lucidity every dream you have. Maybe every night, but I doubt even naturals are conscious every single dream of the night.

I suspect you are searching for some red pill to take in order to get there - the truth of lucidity. Unfortunately the "unconsciousness" is mostly unavailable to us, therefore we work with what we understand. Seeing the parallels between waking life and dream life is what a lot of us do. It makes it easy to find ways in.

Trying to find the truth, the one method for it all, to me is like finding out if the waking life we live in is actually the real one.

See... ever since that red pill thing - I'm now in the Matrix mindset.

Your awareness in dreams is equal to your awareness in life.