Since the Late 1950's

I started lucid dreaming very young with a question. It took my third try to achieve it.
I believed for a long time I was dealing with my sub consciousness.

I learned that one can dream in any and every sense.

I learned that one can stay lucid through mulitple dreams, and the time between them.

When things were not adding up, I learned that dreams were a form of experience tailored to individual minds, but not by that mind. One can react in the dream, but have little control of the environment of that dream. It is a form of psychological modification, lessons if you will. Often questions one must learn to comprehend and answer.

One can even have visual recall in a dream.

I came to a stage where I could see things to come even while awake. I turned away from it--because I understood that it was a question.

I learned how to ask questions, and how to understand the answers given back in metaphor.

It was indicated that I have something to write and express. It is about the fundamentals of language itself--about human judgment. The relationship between the human body, abstraction, convention of names, and metaphor as a means of testing the mind for functionality.

I have spent years in study. The path I was set on was enough for me to focus my studies on questions never answered.

I can see how the Bible is sealed, it is sealed because of linguistic structures not operating in the mind. They are simple structures. Plato did have the answer, however not even Aristotle understood. Even the principles of predication he got wrong.

I have solved the Delian Problem, and know why it was given--the answer has to do with judgment itself and how language is based on definition and what a definition is. I learned what a description is for.

I am here looking for someone who sees what others do not. I need to find a way to express what I have learned. I am looking for a life partner.

What lucid dreaming is, why it would dispear, when it would return is given in the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, but I am not religious. I do know, man is not sane--most cannot even think at all.

It's awesome you still have the ability since a young age. I have a question though -- when you say you could see things to come, even while awake, how is that?

You ask a question and close your eyes, and learn to say what you see. This is the foundation of language, and it depends a great deal on being able to abstract the similar idea in the multiple examples, as Plato tried to get his readers to abstract.

It is a question about vision itself.

I will add, that it is not by one's own ability. It depends on where they are at in the way of development. First of all, the future does not exist. But you can be informed what will be--often in metaphor you will not understand until after the event.

:welcome: to DreamViews, Philospher!

It sounds like you have a lot of experience with lucid dreaming! :)

I certainly can't help much with the 'life partner' thing, but I'm very interested in hearing/reading anything you have to say or need to communicate. What you have said so far is compelling.

I see no more than anybody else, I'm afraid... but I do not accept most explanations for what I DO see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

You ask a question and close your eyes, and learn to say what you see. This is the foundation of language, and it depends a great deal on being able to abstract the similar idea in the multiple examples, as Plato tried to get his readers to abstract.

It is a question about vision itself.

I will add, that it is not by one's own ability. It depends on where they are at in the way of development. First of all, the future does not exist. But you can be informed what will be--often in metaphor you will not understand until after the event.

---

It reminds me of remote viewing.

But, as you are a philosopher, and i enjoy considering myself some sort of a philosopher, i must argue -- you say the future does not exist. And then you say you close your eyes and essentially, view the future: "close your eyes and learn to say what you see." In this, you see "things to come." Things to come would mean the future.

So if you see something from the future, and yet the future does not exist, you are essentially seeing something that doesn't exist. So when you see this thing, if it relates to you, you can choose to manipulate the "future," which doesn't exist anyway, so basically you're veiwing a random event your mind makes up. Your actions in the coming time before this event may lead to the future you have seen consciously or subconsciously, because you believe it is the future. And yet, it doesn't exist. Or, on the contrary, you can choose to avoid this path again consciously or subconsciously.

So maybe it's not a question of you seeing the future, more like you seeing an event you are able to create through upcoming actions.

Of course, there's a lot of fault in my argument, but i'm just playing around. It's no offense to you or anything; i believe what you are able to currently do is astounding. I just had to find a hole :-P

[EDIT]
I just re-read this and realized that while saying you are able to create an event through your upcoming actions, i'm saying you are able to create the future. So actually, you are seeing the future, a future in which you create. Jeez, i'm pretty bad at this :-P

I guess my point is this: the future that you see, if you call it the future, is the future only if the event happens. If this future does not happen and/or you can manipulate these events, it's really not the future, it's just a random metaphor you see. But you've already stated the future does not exist. So do you see the future?

One has to stop approaching Lucid Dreaming as a free for all fantasy state. The human mind has a specific job to do. More fantasy is not worth spit.

The human mind takes experience, processes those experiences in order to predict the resulsts of human behavior that sustains and promotes the life of the body. It's function is to predict the future--its own future.

As of yet you do not know the difference between doing as you please and willing it. You will find this in Plato.

But if you take one definition of the human mind--to predict the results of human behavior, you know that a function of language is just that. You will note that both reasoning and prophecy have the same definition. With certain givens predict a result.

So, you can choose to believe in a tense error "the future is" and flatter yourself that you can see it. Or you can realize that when you learn of it, it is communication--i.e. linguistic.

Now HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART. If you should realize that God does exist--you must also realize that there is a difference between what you want God to be, between what myth says God is. And between what you directly learn yourself.

The lessons are hard in lucid dreaming. Very hard. They are all geared to develope human understanding, and the ability of man to actually have a will.

They are lessons. Specific to your own psycholigcal faults. That is why no two people are going to have the same freedom in state. Nor will you have the same freedoms in every lesson. Certain things will repeat until you understand.

Secondly, it is about getting understanding. It is a whole life project, awake or alseep.

I have not had time to read all these responses in whole. I have to get ready for work.

If you note, I started lucid dreaming in the 50's it was rediscovered in the 60's. I have not followed what has been going on in it. I have set myself to following the path of understanding given to me. As a fantasy state, I have no interest in it. As a mystical state--it is just plain worthless.

If you have had OOB, and are honest, you will note that there were always differences between the OOB and waking. In othe words, if you wanted to fool yourself that you were actually out of your body, it was not because of the state. It was your own desire to lie to yourself. Not a pretty picture that is.

As far as religion goes, you may come to a point where it is indicated to you to read the Bible. What you start to comprehend will be significanly different than what is in myth. Don't confront fanatiics--or religious people. They can not see it. It is not their fault. It is just their level of mental development.

You're definately an interesting person.

By the way, i love Plato. So far i've only read Apology, Euthyphro, Crito, Phaedo, Sophist, and the Republic, but i have his complete works and plan to work my way through them.

As you study Plato, and it may take several readings. You may notice that many, if not all the pieces have an outline based on a principle of logic. The material in the piece examines that principle. You may not get it on the first reading, even the fourth, keep at it. Normal minds cannot see it. Their mind wonders, blindly. Work on it as an exercise.
Plato is not trying to get you to learn by rote, but to think.

I will give you one example: I learned that the couple next door had learned that the lady was preg. She asked me what I saw. I saw a boy in the light and a girl in the dark. I told her I saw nothing. Down the road, a bit she learned that they detected 2 hearbeats. she was going to have twins. I waited. Come time for deliverty, when her husband fainally came home from the hospital, he did not look happy. I asked, what did you have. He sadly said a son.

One of the odd things in seeing has been noted, one hardly ever sees things for themselves. When they do, it is cloaked in metaphor they will not understand until after the event. This insures that they cannot create it--but it should make them realize something about will.

Seeing is a question. Is it by your understanding your will? You have to answer. Learning the answer may run you ragged.

As i understand it, you had the option to tell the expecting mother what you saw. It may have changed something, but yet it may have changed nothing. By not telling her and waiting to see the results, you essentially did not display any free will towards the future event -- although you may not have known what it meant, if you chose to tell the mother what you saw it may have "changed the future," changed what you saw in the vision. Brings me back to Philosophy 101 and all the talk about will :-P

So when you say, "Is it by your understanding your will?" i had a whole thought process going on but i'm not even going to try to type it out; it'll be messy and all over the place. I guess you're right, the answer really will run me ragged.

So how did you develop this seeing, did you practice? Did you have any idea what was going on? I'm sure that must have been a strange and maybe even scary process.

You do not develop it. It is part of the training and if you arrive at that level, it will be up to what ever it is teaching you.

I do not have a rose to offer, but a millstone to offer to a prospective mate. This addendum is a small spreading of my feathers.

Principles of Predication

I started learning about the Principles of Predication through the Judeo-Christian scripture and Lucid Dreaming. Lucid Dreaming actually seemed to indicate to me that I should read the Scripture, which I had not done. I was not studying lucid dreaming with any desire to have a fantasy escape, which included mysticism—often called Religion or Spiritualism. I also had questions about metaphor itself—is metaphor a valid use of logic? In the Scripture, metaphor is called “dark speeches.” I asked this as it came to my attention that the language used in Lucid Dreaming employs metaphor. Why, if I am dealing with my own subconscious am I talking to myself in metaphor! How is it that I know spit about metaphor, but my subconscious does? Also, I have noticed since early on in my school years that the math and English books were so full of errors, it was a wonder anyone was speaking at all. What is the foundation of truth?
When it seemed that it was time to read the scripture, I rebelled and tossed the book across the room. What non-sense! The fit did not last for more than a couple of minutes as it sunk in—this is metaphor. In order to help me study the scripture, I actually hand typed the entire work into a computer—at that time it took seventy two disks, if my memory serves me correctly. Hand typing every word listing in the Concordance served to make not only a spell checker, but also I wrote a program to cross reference that every word in the Concordance was actually in the Scripture. It seems that the copy I worked from actually dropped a couple of passages that I had to add in from another version. Eventually I was to learn, over a number of years of study, that the Book that I tossed across the room as non-sense is the greatest Book ever written in psychology, logic, judgment. It can actually divide between the day and the night.
If metaphor is a valid form of logic, then it has rigid principles by which to comply with, if it is not a valid form of logic it has no valid principles upon which to comply. In other words, if true metaphor is effected by standards it is valid, if not, it is worthless.
Within the text there are numerous metaphors referring to human body life senses—often claiming that there are seven of them. Through my studies of not only the Scripture, but Plato and Euclidean Geometry—I finally arrived at the Principles of Predication. With out these principles actually being a functional part of the human mind, then that person is incapable of judgment—they must learn behavior by habit. This means that there are two distinct methods of teaching human behavior, and one of those must employ simple pleasure and pain. There is a direct link between language and psychology.
Language starts with a convention of names. One principle of logic I have never found in any textbook on logic is;
Law: Every valid manipulation of a name must maintain that names conventional assignment. Once the manipulation of a name has left the realm of convention, then one has left the reality of language and only the appearance of language remains.
There is a distinct difference between a Wordsmith and a Wordsmyth. It is in this wise that many people think they are being rational when in fact they are not—many a celebrated “genius” has actually reached their acclaim not by rationality but only by the appearance of it. The above law is frequently violated even in mathematics. I have also noticed that humans can be taught to repeat a given law, but they are incapable of using it as a part of their own reasoning.
And so, in order to have even a cursory understanding of a convention of names, one need to follow the metaphors which deal with shared experience among men, the seven eyes and seven horns of the beast—seven ways to perceive and seven ways to protect one’s life. This led me to a working description.
A human body life sense system is that human body system which must acquire something from the environment, process that which it has acquired for a product that sustains and promotes the life of that body.
When one uses the definition they can locate all seven life senses—these are not the traditional senses taught. Secondly these life senses are divided by the definition of a thing. Some senses abstract form, and thus they must supply material in order to construct a thing; some senses abstract material and thus they must supply a form to that material in order to construct a thing.
From all of this one has the name of a thing is equated to the names of its various materials and its various forms.
Thus a unit sentence consists of one name of a thing, the predicator (is) which is always present tense, and two predicates, one for form and one for material difference.
There are then, by construction two naming conventions, names of things and names made from the composites of the names of form and material. Predication is the inverse function of abstraction. Therefore, every error in logic places the grammatical structure outside of the realm of language. And, believe it or not, truth from fiction “The ability to speak does not mean you are sentient.”
And foremost, names being conventional, means that they are established from shared experience.
Upon this standard, all grammatical theory, from common grammars to the highest forms of mathematics can be sifted—the wheat from the chaff. And also upon this standard rests the validity of metaphor as a tool to test human psychology.
As the greatest institutes of learning, and the highest rung of their ladders have yet to produce these simple results—nor has a human genius stepped forward to propose them, I think it speaks volumes for some of what may appear to be dubious remarks I have, in this piece, made. Secondly, the results detail enough work for more than one lifetime.

Ah, Philosopher8659: Thank you very much for your enlightening posts; I'm reading each one with great delight. I do not understand everything you write, as expected, but I find what you say to be truly great. Please, keep posting.

I am not here to actually start up a writing session. A problem I do have is being underrstood. I am just looking for someone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

I am not here to actually start up a writing session. A problem I do have is being underrstood. I am just looking for someone.

---

It seems you already know what you are going to find.

I may have been informed, but I certainly do not know.

You see, I constantly doubt my understanding.

Whatever your understanding and journey, i wish you peace.

From what I understand, perhaps I have completed the first two legs of that journey. The third is yet to come. I was actually looking for someone to lean on. I have had two visions in my life. These happend when awake. Time stops and you can see your mistake. I should have been killed over thirty years ago, so I guess I don't have anything to really complain about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

The human mind has a specific job to do.

---

Before the genuflection gets too overbearing I do just want to say that I think you're full of it. Your ideas, and the diction you use to convey them, sound like the typical ululations of a crazed esotericist or conspiracy theorist. You're a goal-oriented, pattern-finding guy with an inherent sense of meaning who's going to take culturally important documents and decipher them to discover the hidden depths of the cosmos, just like generations of manic scholars have done before you. And within the scope of your internalized world your revelations will make perfect sense, and to the hoi polloi it will sound like gibberish but that's entirely a mark of their own mental inferiority and no blemish on your record.

Hey, you're lucky, you've got a purpose, a mission, an order to your life, a frontier to blaze and a truth to defend. That's epic. If only every human could let themselves be so happily deluded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spamtek

Before the genuflection gets too overbearing I do just want to say that I think you're full of it. Your ideas, and the diction you use to convey them, sound like the typical ululations of a crazed esotericist or conspiracy theorist. You're a goal-oriented, pattern-finding guy with an inherent sense of meaning who's going to take culturally important documents and decipher them to discover the hidden depths of the cosmos, just like generations of manic scholars have done before you. And within the scope of your internalized world your revelations will make perfect sense, and to the hoi polloi it will sound like gibberish but that's entirely a mark of their own mental inferiority and no blemish on your record.

Hey, you're lucky, you've got a purpose, a mission, an order to your life, a frontier to blaze and a truth to defend. That's epic. If only every human could let themselves be so happily deluded.

---

I'm glad someone finally said what at least a few of us were thinking.

Maybe I am even schizo---I tried to prove that also, however EEG shot that down. pout. What is a guy to do?

And as far as my diction, can I help it if I was reading Steinbeck when my peers were happy with Spot, Dick, and Jane? I just found the one more culturally significant than the other. Apologies.

And when I can get a machine running in 20 min, when a team of "experts" cannot after three days, its just experience--which I guess has nothing to do with reality.

I do know, however, that sour grapes come in all flavors.

However, your words can be constructed into a great meditational piece, for which I am great full [sic];

If Chaos is the god of the masses, why do their prophets so carefully order their words to prove it? (oh shit, I did not mean to disprove the whole damn thing in one sentence!)
If one cannot spell oxymoron, then perhaps after meditation on 'what is the sound of one hand clapping' and understanding it perhaps even their skills will have improved.

I do wish it were all in fun, however, but what I see is dangerous. If one wants to improve the will of man, then the only path is improve his rationality--the mind is to construct human will. It is the mark of the Beast, which simply means, how well we think determines how well we do. After all, is not 'buying and selling' one of the meanings of the Law of Reciprocity?

so, all philosophy aside, are you looking for someone to get gay with? what do you mean a life partner? there are much better avenues to search for love...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boognish

so, all philosophy aside, are you looking for someone to get gay with? what do you mean a life partner? there are much better avenues to search for love...

---

Well, I guess if you can put "gay", "love" and "life" in the same sentence you certainly have put philosophy aside!

What human body life sense system must acquire DNA and process that DNA in order sustain and promote the life of the human body?

Standards of human morality are written in biological law.

It is hardly rational to claim that A does not equal A.

Secondly, I am thinking that there may be a psychological difference between lucid dreamers and other people. I don't know. I do know that if one were to post some of the material on this site, that makes perfect sense on sites where people do not lucid dream, the respose to those posts is radically different.

The defence of myth pervades many more fields than religion. For example, I spent many years in geometry. I even added processes that had never before been figured out. For example, how to muliply and divide a line by a line--a straight forward projection. The figure can do many other manipulations as well. However, all of my results point to how to validate Euclidean Geometry as a standard. My work has been sent out to many places, with only one reply--we cannot post your results because it does not fit our agenda.

Imagine what would happen, if all of a sudden, all non-Euclidean geomtries were easily demonstrated as false. How? Complete the math set for Eulicdean Geometry, which I did. See if you can get anyone to touch it. If there is a one to one correspondence between Euclidean Geometry and basic Algebra, Basic Algebra could no longer be used to disprove Euclidean Geometry.

Another path to proof is simply based on the foundation of language itself. Names are conventional. There is no room for doubt.

I will say up front I already have my own life partner. I'm no philosopher (can't even spell the word without help and apologize for any typos), but I am open minded and intrigued by your posts. I can see how a lot of people would say you're full of it. Some of the things you say can be difficult to accept and believe. Other things are downright impossible for my creative mind to see how it can work. (I don't do geometry)

While I've been reading what you have to say, Philosopher8659, I could not help but think of the conversations you could have with my husband. If that ever was possible to happen, I would love to sit in to listen and see how it would go. Like you, my husband has some interesting abilities and ideas that most people would think he's crazy if he told them half the things he's told me. He's made the mistake of telling someone who was not open to what he had to tell her, and we ended out falsly booted from a fun group we were involved in. She denies it, but I know us being booted has a lot to do with what she thinks about what she was told.

Too bad it is not likely you would have an opportunity to speak with my husband. I think the two of you would have a lot to say to each other. I wish you luck and hope you find someone as open minded as I am (or more so) to spend life with.

Right now I feel like a chimpanzee that has been given a sword. I don't know why, nor do I know how to use it. I only know that something is horribly wrong with man's ability to think. There is only one place to go to gain understanding. If I make it I make it, if i don't I don't.

I wish I couldn't think...

Relation to self is altogether inadamissable. Plato

I actually have so many projects to do, I don't really have an excuss of "noting to do". I have been contemplating making cartoons that explain step by step the principles of grammar not yet taught. There are so many approaces. Formal, informal, visual, etc., Sad part is, so few are disciplined enough to formally follow a sentence much less an entire work. I think everyone missed a grand piece of historical humor. Plato and the theory of forms, based on truth. Spinoza, theory of material could not even construct the first proposition without a contradiction- and the rest of it kept getting worse-- and Einstein praised him! That is so funny.

A thing is any difference in any shape or form. So, one can have wave theory based on form, and quantum mechanics based on material--without a contradiction. The contradictions are introduce on the fundamental of mathematical theory, and an unawareness of just what one is naming with the numbers.

As I said, I have plenty to keep me busy while I attempt a reentry into lucid dreaming. I left it to verify the principles of grammar I was seeing. That is done.

I'll be your life partner.

First a relationship is an agreement between two people.
Second, it is not the mark of an honest person who tries to give away that which is not thiers to give. Perhaps you should ask someone what "the age of consent" means.

What a strange and unhappy life you must have, man. No offense, but I think you're a little in over your head.

If you can look at the human condition today, and be happy then you don't even have a head to get over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

If you can look at the human condition today, and be happy then you don't even have a head to get over.

---

That's why ignorance is bliss. Hello by the way :)

So, you found some philosophies who have taken the royal road to bliss!
Today we can achieve it through microwaving our hair every morning! The wonders of technology!

Hello, to you too.

While your exemplary use of grammar and philisophical speaking are intriguing, a large part of me has difficulty believing you are as you say you are? Keep in mind that you are using a method to find love that is statisticaly the worst way possible. Answer me this. How are we to believe that you are in fact as intelligent as you say? How are we to believe that you are not just amusing yourself at our expense? Your twisted words and enlightining opinions have given me a pleasurable read without a doubt; but quiet frankly, any bozo with the internet could copy and paste such statements to help imitate true intelligence. Now i ask humbly, what is it that you have to teach us? If your wisdom in the subject that all of us here strive to learn is so impeccable, then please do share with us your knowledge. Also tell me, how is that you have attained lucidity in the past?

When I started as a young child I observed man's inability to do right. I said to myself, perhaps reality is too hard, can dreams be used to practice in. I set myself a goal, to simply tell my mother in a dream that I was in fact dreaming.

I entered state on the third try. I found myself in our kitchen and my mother was doing the dishes, back to me. I looked around and started to leave. My mother turned and asked, "What do you want, Jay?" I remembered. I spread my hands and said, all of this is a dream.

From then on I learned to role play in my dreams, to experiement.

I often rebelled, I know that dreams of fear are a question to the dreamer--how important is knowing to you? Learn to calm your mind, and see.

As far as my intelligence go, I did not ask you to believe it. I could give a rats ass if you do or not. If you would like a copy of some of my work, it has been on the net for years. Just recently, I let my sites go, for lack of interest. I use to make audiobooks, ebooks, etc and give them away free. No ad's, no thank you, simply free. The Underground Grammarian was one series, Mitchell was a very bright and funny guy. Dialogs of Plato anothe series. Math books, were original source documents, sometimes I would critique the work with just a few equations showing how horrible the work was. The author did not know how to write up a geometric figure into equations. Fact is, Cartesian geometry originated the same way. It is useful, but in a limited sense.

It took me years to figure out what the meaning of a test in dreamstate was about, years before I understood the Trinity. All I know, is it is one of very few times I was spoken to in English. At the end of the test, all I got was All right. You win.

The first part of the test was about perception, the second conception, the third will.

At that time I was completely stumped as to what it was about.

Your mind is not different from itself. One part of it does not teach the other part. And so, to start, questioning your own sanity is not a bad idea, however, when facts get involved, real facts, these are things you cannot even imagine.

And you should not believe me about anything. That is not what it is about, learning by rote. Do it for yourself, between you and your teacher--and learn by experience--belief in words that you have no experience in, is exactly what judgment is not about.

I will give you a hint about Christ. It was not about the miricles, It was about the Word becoming flesh. Word does not mean something different than word. If you learn to say what you see in his miricles, you will find the same metaphors in the OT. You had to say what you saw. Only someone who had understanding would have known what it was about. Those who always claim to talk in God's stead, did not even know the first thing about how one is taught. The same method that is used to teach in what you call the lucid dreamstate. Language begins with perception, saying what you see. As simple as that. Men are doing that--the sick are being healed, the dead raised.

Now, if you still wish to believe me, when you know the truth is there to be found, you are a fool.

Let me give you another hint. For over a couple thousand years, man has asked why there are two accounts of creation, a blessing and a curse. Watch as the curse is turned into a blessing.

The Serpent spoke in the name of the Lord.
What he said came to pass.
God confirmed his words. (By Law, these three make the Serpent a prophet)
Man's life was increased.
Man became like God, knowing judgment.

How is it, if Gen 3 was about the fall of man, did he become like God after the fall. Duh.

What better way to test human judgment than by pitting the Biggest against the smallest.. Hello world, you failed. Don't worry, though, it was known that you were going to fail. Its a wake up call.

And so in response, you abandoned your philisophical bullshit for a second to say one thing that i could easily understand. That is, that you could give a rats ass as to whether or not i believe in your intelligence. However, i feel i may have been misunderstood. I do not doubt your intelligence, as your vocabulary in certain specific responses leaves me no doubt that you are a smart man/woman. It is to your authenticity as a person that my confidence is lacking. Your goal on these forums is not yet clear so please do explain? As for your authenticity, we will never know if you are a doped up college student playing games or in fact the very accomplished person you state to be. So i suppose a simple debt of trust is in order which i have no trouble granting to you. Now on the subject of you finding a mate take my advice, this is not the right place to be looking and a man of your intellectual capacity should be aware of that obvious truth. Awaiting your witty comeback

Witty reply.

Some wise guy, said if one does not look, from the living unto the dead for truth, it is because there is no light in them.

Secondly, I am hedging a bet. I could be wrong, however, if man is being taught in the lucid dreamstate, one would expect to find people who actually can comprehend better than those who do not.

If there is an area here, to post perhaps PDF files, I would be glad to display some of my work.

OH, shit Deliansolution.us is still active, how about that. Have not posted there in a long while. Deliansolution.com got bought up. There is a java sketch of the deliansolution still up.
Is that witty enough?

Not its quiete alright. Again there is no way of you being able to prove that it is in fact your work so i will prolong that discussion no further. At what point did the most recent lucid dream you recall take place? What events took place? Why do you insist on speaking in vague responses? We are all people here, feel free to act like one ROBOT!
Just Joshin ya :)

actually you can. You see to buy a web address, there is a public record of it. You can access it online. And I know one of the two sites, has my very own picture of me on it.

And some of my work has The Trinity Project on it. I am John Clark.

So, scarry isn't it? Oh, and my logo is 312. Look up John 3:12 That is the number of lines for each gliph.

If you are hearing vague responses, take off the headphones.

I even have some very old work of the delian project preserved on public distribution of a shareware CD rom. Imagine that.

PS the email link on that site does not work, it goes to the site I let go.

Is it not amazing, the point when people say "I don't understand him, he must therefore be a dumb ass." Talk about philosophical bull shit--we don't care who we slander in order to blow ourselves up to poster size. Have a great day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

First a relationship is an agreement between two people.
Second, it is not the mark of an honest person who tries to give away that which is not thiers to give. Perhaps you should ask someone what "the age of consent" means.

---

Why do you have to hurt me so?

PS

What does "the age of consent" mean thx

Ask your mom or dad, thx.

Playing hard to get, eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark75

Why do you have to hurt me so?

PS

What does "the age of consent" mean thx

---

The age of consent is the age at which you are legal to choose to be with a partner 18 or older. The age of consent is 18.

As for "one" blowing themselves up to poster size, Shamrox say, "look at yourself you must, only then will you find a big hypocritical poster."

I can see this is going nowhere. I am only trying to recieve some of the knowledge you claim to posess. I believe we all were. I retire from this topic, enjoy the forums and i look forward to seeing posts from you in the future.

Always. I guess I was hatched that way.

Well, I see you really understand what knowledge is. My, how impressive, you read my entire website and understood it in a few minutes. What are you doing on earth? And yes, you are going no where and fast, but that is your choice. If you think you can get wisdom on a silver platter, you have microwaved your hair too many times.

Show me your years of work, I have opened mine to you, and you still boast like a fool.

Were you on dateline MSNBC's, "To catch a predator?" I swear I saw you on that show. Yea, I'm talking to you Philosopher8659.

Well, now is that not cute. One fool joins another. Have a great day! As you have noting intelligent to say, why do you open your mouth at all? There are some very intelligent people on this site, and they see right through you.

Oh, gosh, now I am scared!

Yeah! You tell 'em!

Please do explain when and where my boasting began and ended? I have made no claims in this entire conversation, and made no mention of myself, my personal achievements or even intelligence. Therefore, how could i be boasting? You on the other hand have ran an entire topic on the stated. As i said politely there is no possible way of you proving your authenticity for the last time as we are on the INTERNET. Which is why i will not waste my valuable time reading "your" so called work. Nothing you can show me will prove what you have done. I asked you a simple question amongst all the rambling and that was if you would mind sharing your knowledge on lucid dreaming. I never recieved a response and as our discussion has dragged on it seems that your speech and reason have betrayed you. An obvious sign of your frustration, so i have humbly withdrawn and yet you still respond with confrentational words. Thank you for proving that you are as simple minded as the rest of us. Have a nice day.

Maybe you can get one or more of your peers to explain things to you. Try a support group. Might even try . . . . gosh do I say it . . . . actually studying something! Sorry, I did not mean to offend you. One thing you said is true, no amount of evidence put under your nose is going to constitute proof of anything. I believe that. I really do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Maybe you can get one or more of your peers to explain things to you. Try a support group. Might even try . . . . gosh do I say it . . . . actually studying something! Sorry, I did not mean to offend you.

---

Laying down the law. That is so attractive. ^_______........^

These are the wisdomful ramblings of a self proclaimed philosopher who cannot keep his cooth in a civil discussion.

P.S. Your grammar and punctuation have suffered severely in your more recent posts. Maybe you should go back to busting your balls to try and mimic yoda.

I apologize if you could not read even one of the books I posted on my website. No reflection on you though. Now you want to pick the lint off my ass and scream about that too. What a mind! I admire you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

As you have noting intelligent to say, why do you open your mouth at all? There are some very intelligent people on this site, and they see right through you.

---

And you're not one of them! Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh burn.

Lol, you are honestly, mad... I'm pretty sure that you are responding in this way due to the fact that i made you feel intelectually inferior. Must you insist with the insults? Good luck with whatever the hell your talking about oh great wise man... Hopefully you can keep your story straight in the future. Oh and next time try not dodging every question with an irrelevant shady answer...

Oh, yes, you have gravely humbled me. Undone years of study, by your great wisdom. My laughter is only my madness!!!!

Its been great fun guys, but I have put in a ten hour day today, and all of it on my feet. Time for beddy bye. Kisses.

So..................asl?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Oh, yes, you have gravely humbled me. Undone years of study, by your great wisdom. My laughter is only my madness!!!!

Its been great fun guys, but I have put in a ten hour day today, and all of it on my feet. Time for beddy bye. Kisses.

---

I put in 11 hours for 3 days in a row. All on my feet. Still had room to party afterwords. Cry more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark75

So..................asl?

---

lmao

Calling a man mad twice, is a reflection of behaviour.

Well, I think I am failing in my objective here. Anyone know how to get off this site and have all posts deleted?

I guess only an admin/moderator can help you there. Click the staff button under the Dream Views banner. I'll miss you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Well, I think I am failing in my objective here. Anyone know how to get off this site and have all posts deleted?

---

You just leave. We don't do mass deletions.

I'm sorry you have attracted the attention of our immature kiddie population. There really are some great people here, but it takes some effort to find them and work around the clutter. I find it worth the effort, and I'm certainly less patient than most.

I'll see you around. I'm sure of it.

Godspeed.

this has been an interesting, if confusing, conversation to read. Better than most soap operas!

Why did people attack this man for showing his world?

In a face-to-face discussion, i seriously doubt such sarcastic insults would happen.

Your worlds are just as insane, conforming to false realities in self built prisons.

Skepticism was here. Insulting cynicism was masked under such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClouD

Why did people attack this man for showing his world?

In a face-to-face discussion, i seriously doubt such sarcastic insults would happen.

Your worlds are just as insane, conforming to false realities in self built prisons.

Skepticism was here. Insulting cynicism was masked under such.

---

What are you reffering to? There were but two posts by anyone even doubting his world, or his opinion. I for one am very interested in his world and reason. But their is an extreme lacking in his ability to explain it. Every answer was a dodge from the question. Typing intelligent phrases does not mean it was an intelligent answer. I think most are just frustrated that he would not simply share his "so called" knowledge which is why they were frustrated. I for one feel that way. Of course that makes me doubt if there is actually any knowledge to be spoken of. Or only some fancy metaphorical responses that are in no way relevent to the questions he was asked. Or perhaps you or i misread. Either way, its not as big of a deal as it has been made. Just an intelligent conversation which i for one enjoyed. Of course he did say that finding a mate was his goal on these forums. So by saying he is not accomplishing what he set out to, and therefore is deleting his account, could even mean he has realized this is not the place. Thank god for that. My point is noone attacked this man for his world, and i said many times he is as simple minded as the rest of us no better or no worse. All of our worlds are in fact as wild and with that i agree with you cloud. :) This topic should be closed.

While I find no interest in this persons reasons for being on these forums, what was said by him does have certain relavance.

What it boils down to is changing the way in which you percieve your dreams, and for that matter your waking state as well.

The physical reality , whether in a dream or awake is not really what it appears to be. Well , it is, but there is exponatially more to it that is hidden behind the obvious.

In dreams, if one can break the habit of approaching and taking what is "seen" for face value ( ie: as the physical objects they appear to be) then one can begin to observe their dreams from a metaphorical perspective. Its not much unlike learing a whole new language, or more so - learning to think all over again.

Rather than simply "playing" in your dreams with lucidity, or working to control your dreams, one starts to be the observer and learns things about themselves from their dreams. Learn how to ask questions and the answers manifest in your dreams. What arises in your dreams is a manifestation of ones own self in one way or another.

At least this is what I am "seeing" in the comments along with seeing such in my own experience.

You are on the right trail. Thank you. j.c.

Take the word "cat", it stands for many animals, yet by the fact you can all call them "cat" you agree that they all share the same "form" but you probably do not know what that means yet, however that is the foundation of metaphor itself. Plato tried to get his readers to abstract it, no one did, not even Aristotle. Yet in the fundamentals of Set Theory, you know there are only two methods of constructing a set, enumeration and definition. Enumeration is to memory, as definition is to reason. This fact speaks volumes on the illigitimate method of teaching children today. I did not invent it, nor did Plato, it is a physical fact of reality.

This fact is also the boundaries of human psychology. It has already been noted that very high IQ people "group" things differently than "normal" people. This is the primary reason, "normals" find them "strange".

What is sad, no amount of memory, or the reading of words, or lectures, will ever change a person's innate ability to judge. The only hope, is mental exercise--not the exercise of memory.

And they are dangerous, those whose mind can do little more than enumerate, they are addicted to it, and demand to be told, but when you tell them to learn to think, they will often kill to support their addiction.

This is why I say, one can join this cause, or that cause, for this or that reason, and you are no more than an ant pissing on a forest fire. Every particular problem is one universal problem, and it is not "out there" it is within.

I started to study psychology at around 13. I did not have to read much to understand that it was not yet a science and it had a long way to go--they did not have a standard. Only now is the doo-doo hitting the fan, search YouTube under Psychiatry. I have download over 450 megs of it.

Finally you have stepped towards what i was trying to get out of you... Your information to share. I agree with you completely. In that i understand mans too common mistake in misunderstanding intelligence. Sometimes i wander if it is a blessing or a curse to those that others do consider intelligent. Humans often react harshly and even feel threatened by those of higher thinking. This is in part why so called "nerds" are mistreated in schools. When in all reality they should be highly respected. It is hard to determine however, whether this is a natural human reaction which is uncontrollable by the individual. Or if it is simply acting out on jealous emotions. Why do some feel threatened by those with knowledge instead of trying to learn from them and thrive on their own? It's a much too common mistake that im afraid we will never solve. A mystery, that will never be discovered.

So, we shouldn't judge other things... we should work on ourselves and try to gain knowledge? Is that part of what's being said?

First of all, prejudice is often called judgment, it is not. Judgment follows specific grammartical laws; these laws parallel physical law. If one does not know them, then what they say has nothing to do with judgment. One has to learn judgment, or, as a great philosopher once said, well, you know, you probably read it--about the mote and the beam in one's eye. When you have a group of things, all covered by the same definition, then one can refer to any item in the group, while meaning another. Plato actually tried to get the reader to start thinking about this in Parmenides. For example "blind, deaf, lame, poor, hungry" but not knowing it, refers all, to the one not mentioned, mind. This is the art of metaphor. Only when one "sees" what they are, do they know where they are at.

That is the gist of my work, if the principles of predication are not known, then can anyone say they know judgment? In many areas of science and technology, things are fair, but in common grammar, the media of social discourse, man is still wielding a club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

This is why I say, one can join this cause, or that cause, for this or that reason, and you are no more than an ant pissing on a forest fire. Every particular problem is one universal problem, and it is not "out there" it is within.

---

In Dzogchen its has been said that in order for one to be able to help others, one must first, above all else, help oneself.

Spontaneous Self arising wisdom is also spoken of in the texts. This is how I have come to see the dreaming process, as self arising wisdom, "wisdom" because such is there to show oneself ones own nature. This is shown through metaphor using the images in the dreams.

Lately it seems that lucidity is also spontaneous and self arising. Many on this site playing with dreams and lucidity speak from a standpoint of gaining lucidity through effort, however when I leave the dreaming process unhindered and unchanged and just play the role of observer I am finding that the lucidity arises in the dreams on its own and in places in the dreams where there is a clear message to be "known". The less I "try" or "interefere" the more clarity and meaning the dreams have, even to the point of the interpretation of the dream arising in the dream within the lucidity.

Such goes hand in hand with a great many teachings I have become familiar with.

Also, years ago I had a dream that left a notion "burnt" into this consciousness. That notion was "Thought without words". The dream , which I dont remember anymore other than the basic implications I am talking of now, had the "feeling" of pertaining to a critical milestone. The relavance of this dream is just now starting to show up in the things I am "seeing' of late.

Does any of this perception I am experienceing have any relavance to the 'view' you have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

In many areas of science and technology, things are fair, but in common grammar, the media of social discourse, man is still wielding a club.

---

Again, this i agree with strongly. We do all slip don't we? Why is it that man has so much trouble expressing himself verbaly?

One part I understand, the other is a contradiction.

The "self" which is before thought, before words, before emotion, before perception. Independent. This is pure being--it is not thought, or emotion. One subjectively identifies with thought and emotion, but it is not what we are. We are that which preceeds these. Words and the emotion, memory, content we use to craft and are our resources--the material of mind craft.

However, wisdom arising in the self by the self is not possible--has one ever seen a plant thrive without nutient? Eaten and were filled on imagination? Breathed when there is no air. This part of what you believe is self-referential, meaning that a thing is different from itself, that A -- A <> 0. We cannot show ourselves the future just as we cannot feed our own stomach. Why work for a living or even bother to take the first breath of life if the self is indendent of ALL?

The part of listening in order to attain clairity is true--for it even shows you your contradiction. You are being taught to perceive--perception is the act a acquiring that which is not yet a part of you. Fundamental to every life sense. It is by craft that we attain to dominion over the environment. We attain to dominion in order to have life and have it more abundantly. It is by this that we attain and maintain identity A = A. By being aware of our subjective identification with what we are not, we learn to attain to clarity. When we confuse what we are with what we are not, we loose our identity.

I am that which is before perception, before conception and before will. I can or cannot learn to be a craftsman and I can or cannot express being.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

One part I understand, the other is a contradiction.

The "self" which is before thought, before words, before emotion, before perception. Independent. This is pure being--it is not thought, or emotion. One subjectively identifies with thought and emotion, but it is not what we are. We are that which preceeds these. Words and the emotion, memory, content we use to craft and are our resources--the material of mind craft.

However, wisdom arising in the self by the self is not possible--



I am that which is before perception, before conception and before will. I can or cannot learn to be a craftsman and I can or cannot express being.

---

I need to clarify.

I directly know the state of being prior to perception. the part that you have said preceed all else, I know directly.

"Wisdom" arising from this is not what I am getting at. It would appear that the "wisdom" or midcraft or whatever label one wishes to assign such is itself, self arising. At least seemingly.

I know the ground state of emptiness ( dharmakaya), I know the embodied state, or the state of the "manufactured me"(nirmanakaya). It is this inbetween state( sambhogakaya), where the arising of ?????? takes place that I am currently "looking at".

Does this change anything for you in relation to the answer you previously gave?

"I directly know the state of being prior to perception" You do not see any logical error in this construction? This is something beyond my power, to perceive before perception. Plato played with the inscription "Know Thyself" as he knew that the way it was traditionally thought to mean is self-referential and thus impossible. When principles of reasoning are not operant in your mind, then one cannot even read and understand correctly. It is these faults that produce mystics.

Plato actually wrote a specific piece dealing with relation to self, Charmides. Keeping with his use of that logical form as an outline of the piece, Charmides was actually related to Plato. It is well worth the study.


Let me address a distinct and separate issue. I acquired "The Science of Yoga". by I.K. Taimni while I was stationed in Thailand during the Vietnam war. Just reading the work made my head hurt. I studied the work, not because of what Taimni wrote, but because of the sutras themselves. If one has any kind of a memory at all, even if it is something as strange as Sanskrit, one could see a grave inconsistency in the translation. Later, when I had a place of my own, I took a closer look at the sutras. I used the online dictionaries and compiled an almost exhaustive dictionary particular to the sutras themselves. I even made a couple PDF handbooks of Sanskrit grammar.

I found that the sutras are written in a formal style--and are very much modeled after Plato's theory of forms. Patanjali was a Sanskrit scholar, a realist, not a mystic. In order for the sutras to be mistranslated as badly as they are, a second Patanjali was created to support the myth about the sutras.

Whenever one is dealing with any type of religion or cult, start with the founding documents themselves and forget the commentaries. Read the man. The really nice trick about the Yoga Sutras, is, being one doctrine about awareness and reality, how it spawned so many different kinds of so called Yoga, each with a different doctrine. These were often spawned from just one line of the Sutras themselves--and each of them denying the reality in front of their face in preference to imagination. This effect is brought about because logical structures are, once again, not a functional part of their mind.

One of the items that mystics love, is untranslated foreign words, as if reality is not the same for each and every one of us. On this account, I will leave you. I am not a mystic, nor do I agree in the methods of transmitting mysticism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

"I directly know the state of being prior to perception" You do not see any logical error in this construction? .

---

Give me some leeway on the use of lingual terms here as some may or may not "fit" the situation as applied.

Of course I do see such error in logic. However, the experience was there, and through memory is there now. Such a experience has been on several occasions now. This is a given with me. The knowing of it is there on this consciousness and in such a way it cannot be doubted or denied.

Being on the memory, that means the experience could not have occured prior to this mental and conscious construct. I liken it to having to build the mirror before one can see ones own face.

Knowledge of that "prior" state has to occur on the conscious mental construct.

Looking at this it woul also sem likely that this prior state could only be "known" by directy being of that state.

So, logically that would lean to the tieing of the prior state to the physical conscious state in some inseperable way.

I would like to note, that I am not trying to prove anything to anyone for any sort of external purpose, what I am doing is trying to know more about the things I have experienced, or the " visions' I have had. I learn more whether others agree or disagree, it is the exchanges I find all sorts of little helpful "utensils".

Any thoughts?

None at all. The only two visions I have had happened in real time, while making a fatal error. By rights, I should have been killed by my own stupidity about thrity years ago. I count it a blessing that I have not had a vision since, as that would mean that I was still making very bad choices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

By rights, I should have been killed by my own stupidity about thrity years ago. I count it a blessing that I have not had a vision since, as that would mean that I was still making very bad choices.

---

You have mentioned that twice now, please elaborate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

I started lucid dreaming very young with a question. It took my third try to achieve it.

When things were not adding up, I learned that dreams were a form of experience tailored to individual minds, but not by that mind. One can react in the dream, but have little control of the environment of that dream. It is a form of psychological modification, lessons if you will. Often questions one must learn to comprehend and answer.

---

Isn't controlling the dream environment one of the key motivations for learning to have lucid dreams? I know I'm able to exert a fair amount of control over the environments in the few LDs I've had.

What I found is that one can, like being awake, control one's responses to the environment, however, contol of the environment itself is either very difficult or in many cases was not possible. Secondly, when I went into state to see if I could use the state to practice math in, instead I was tested.
I will say this, one of the best experiences in state is listening to music, so beautiful its not even discribable.

As far as the visions go, these were years before it was indicated to me to read the Scripture, before I knew what a vision was. At the time of their happening, I tucked them away as being wholly impossible--except for the fact that I should have been killed--but because of the vision, I was given a choice. I was allowed to see what I couild not see.

The second of these I will elaborate.
I was pulling out of Wall Mart down south. However, there was traffic lined up to get into the place, and the road was at the top of a slope. I could not see oncoming traffic, so I just waited for a break in what I could see. There was me, my wife, and her grandmother in the front seat. As soon as I hit the gas, time stopped. I found myself some 500 feet away, standing in the middle of the road. I could see my car, me and the other passengers. I could also see a car doing 55 + coming down the road. I could not believe it, this cannot happen. I decided to study the oncoming car, I seen two passengers front seat. I took my time. It seemed that I had all the time in the world. Then I was back behind the wheel. Time was still stopped. I was still in disbelief. I thought, I can ignore all this, or I can act on what I cannot see. I decided to act, as soon as I did, time started again. I was hitting the break and turning the wheel. The car slid around me, did not even touch me, I made a note to check out the front seat, yes, there were two in the front. I then, in shock proceeded on my way. Had I not reacted, had not learned, it would have impacted my door at over 50 mph. In an old ford, I would have been killed as my head exploded agains the side window. What really puzzled me is that in so far as how fast everything happened, and how much time I was given to examine and think about everything, from what I have read, the human mind cannot even think that fast. I really did take my time, I was in shock that such things could happen.

At that time, I was still studying Lucid Dreaming under the assumption that I was playing with my own subconsciousness. Years later, when I read the scripture pertaining to visions, it is plainly stated, they would be limited to immediate happenings for a reason.

Wow, if thats true, thats an incredible story.

I have never been religious, nor spiritual. I found the whole thing simply at odds with everything I believed.

I have postulated an idea. That there is life in the Galaxie and it is very old and very advanced. However, like tenders of the stars, there is a watermark of rationality that must be attained to, before one is even considered sentient. Maybe the Earth is considered a wild life preserve.

What I find even harder to believe, that because of these visions, and learning the language of the dream, by definition I am a prophet--which is one of the last things in the world I would ever want to be. Surely, anyone can learn as I have, what is the point? I don't know. I do know this, when shock passed away, anger set in. Why of all the people in the world, was my sorry ass saved, surely there are many who are worthy and they should have been instead of me.

I am still not religious, nor do I believe in life after death. As far as religion goes, what I see is -- well to put it in the words of the text itself, a text written to "test the heart of man"--- heart is a parable for mind. The reason that is so, what it takes in, is exactly what is inside, is exactly what it puts out---the metaphor is based on truth. It is a test of the human mind.

Aha! You're still here! I knew you wouldn't abandon me like that. =)

How do you know it is me? I might be a fragment of some wino's imagination?

See if anyone can guess what this means. It is really quite simple.

I was shown a sign in a lucid dreamstate, the results of a question,

"Express C.M."

I admit, it took me years of study to comprehend it because I had not learned the principles involved.

It's okay. I accept you for who you are. =)

Well, that makes one of us, cept you have no idea, you just have no idea. There are things I just cannot talk about.

I understand. Let's not spoil the moment with words, anyway.

Okay, I will quietly munch my Honey Roasted Peanuts. Okay, times up. So why does one of your profiles say you are 11 and another says you are 20?

Let's not spoil it with obnoxious crunching and the fact that you aren't sharing with me. Also, those were words.

Do you believe that Muhammad was a Prophet? I know he claimed to be the Prophet who would come after Christ, however, that Prophet was suppose to do some very specific things, which he did not do. These things are written of him from the front to the back of the Scripture.

Whoops. Let me go ahead and adjust that for increased clarity.

Okay, thats better. Question answered. You know of course, that in some countries, that warrents a death sentence? It is dangerous. And now that you found me, which is better than I hope to achieve, I would hate to be lost by someone again.

I would liketo thank you for your commentaries thus far. I have found some of it helpful putting into focus a few things I have been dwelling upon.

You are welcome. You made me remember questions I asked long ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

You know of course, that in some countries, that warrents a death sentence? It is dangerous.

---

No worries. I'll just explain to them that I did it for the lulz.

It is kinda hard to explain things when your head is not in the same vacinity as your body. A crowd recently wanted to behead a teacher for naming a teddy bear Muhammad. From what was on the News, she was sentenced to 15 days in jail and deported.

Yeah, or I could tell them before they cut my head off.

So, you evaded my question as to your age.

Yeah, I'm good at that. Have I caught your interest?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

You are welcome. You made me remember questions I asked long ago.

---

We all do move along at our own paces. One thing that has developed for me over the last couple of years is quite a bit of patience.

"Have I caught your interest?"

So far no. Curiosity yes, but not interest. Having spent a number of recent years on the net looking for someone has made me quite a piece of jade.

You poor thing. Rule 30 probably didn't help much, either, huh? But it's okay. I'd never let you down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

What I found is that one can, like being awake, control one's responses to the environment, however, contol of the environment itself is either very difficult or in many cases was not possible. Secondly, when I went into state to see if I could use the state to practice math in, instead I was tested.
I will say this, one of the best experiences in state is listening to music, so beautiful its not even discribable.

---

Well what do you consider control. In my very first LD I was able to make a bus drive into my field of view from no where through will alone. No one on this board has considered that an exceptional feat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

nor do I believe in life after death.

---

What do you believe about death?

What do I believe about death? Nothing at all.

About the bus---having some desire in lucid dreamstate accomplished is not the same as having control over the environment itself. You certainly would not say that if you asked your mom for a cookie and she gave you one that you have control over your mom. I use to have entire dream segments repeated, so that I could change my response--to see what it felt like, for example, to be a victor and then the vanquished. However, this is the distinction. I am aware that I effect my movements and responses, how the rest is done, I am not aware of--therefore, if I don't know how that is done, how can I possibly claim I did it? That is absurd.

If one does not know how human will is attained, I suppose it is quite natural to confuse the acquisition of something desired for an expression of human will, however, these errors in judgment often lead to self-flattery, self-importance, which are in fact only illusions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

About the bus---having some desire in lucid dreamstate accomplished is not the same as having control over the environment itself. You certainly would not say that if you asked your mom for a cookie and she gave you one that you have control over your mom. I use to have entire dream segments repeated, so that I could change my response--to see what it felt like, for example, to be a victor and then the vanquished. However, this is the distinction. I am aware that I effect my movements and responses, how the rest is done, I am not aware of--therefore, if I don't know how that is done, how can I possibly claim I did it? That is absurd.

If one does not know how human will is attained, I suppose it is quite natural to confuse the acquisition of something desired for an expression of human will, however, these errors in judgment often lead to self-flattery, self-importance, which are in fact only illusions.

---

I wouldn't claim that I control my mom when she brings me a cookie because she's a sentient being capable of deciding not to grant my request. If I pull out a remote and turn on the TV, I would be willing to say I have control of the TV. Perhaps it is not total control, the TV itself can break, the remote could run out of batteries, but the TV itself can not resist through its own will since it is inanimate and has no will.

Are you suggesting our dreams have a will of their own?

"One can react in the dream, but have little control of the environment of that dream."

What you're saying now sounds more like "one can never know if they truly control any aspect of their dreams, or if their dreams merely accommodate them".

Also by the same reasoning couldn't you argue that we don't know for sure if we really control our physical bodies? Couldn't we interject the possibility that our own muscles merely grant a request?

Its like this, if you learn of things that will happen in the future, and many of us have, and sometimes given informaton that we could not possibly have, in a dream, are you suggesting that you pulled it out of your butt?

I use Occam's razor. Since it is the function of the human mind to learn from experience in order to predict the results of human action such that it sustains and promotes the life of the body, then I would say that this is the definition of sentience.

Therefore, when you learn of things that could not possibly originate within concerning things you have no control over, use the definition. The surprising thing about it, this is exactly the test used in the Judeo-Christian Scripture to test if or if not God has informed you of anything. What a coincidence!!!!

The definition of sentience is used to test for sentience!!!

However, if you desire to think that by some form of magic your mind is so special it can do the impossible, that is your choice. Mine is to be rational.

One will notice that a logic system itself takes a number of givens to predict a results--do you think it is a coincidence that prophecy and logic are both covered by the same definition? And do you further suggest that the Plan stated in the Scripture, to bring man to a point that he knows judgment, which involves logic, to be just another coincidence?

I would have to say, from experience, that I have no power to see what is not--the future--at least not even near the magnitudes that I have seen, I would also say that I will it not. There is only one rational results.

I will tell you this--I was informed of one of my son's death, in a metaphor, even before I met the woman I had them with, I was even informed that it would be by negligence. Also, that I would take possession of my son from her quickly and would meet no resistence. As it was unfolding, I seen it, understood it, and knew I would not be resisted. I actually had to fly overnight to Texas when it all went down. Now, as I said, sometime the lessons are hard, very hard. When the events were happining, then I understood the meaning. This pattern is even explained in the Scripture, and the reason for it.

And do you think it is by chance that it is written that man is dead, until his mind comes to function? Even Plato told you that one, and explained it quiet well.

The resurrection of the dead is not magic, it is simply a biological fact.

I have found, all I have learned, very difficult, but undeniable.

I would say, however, to top it all off, is don't worry about it. If these are things you can someday understand, you will learn them. Keep using the lucid dream state, explore it, ask questions. There you will find a teacher. Until you abstract by your own experience the truth of the matter, you cannot believe, nor understand.

Was that for someone who posted before me?

I can't follow how you got onto that topic.

Excuse me, I thought you were talking about the will, whose will initiates dreams. My mistake, I see.

I'm sure that you are familiar with Plato's Allegory of the Cave. In this alegory he talks about the path to enlightenment. That it is difficult, and once you are "out of the cave" the light is painfull, so one would want to go back to the shadows that they are used to. Overtime your eyes would adjust and you would be able to see reality for what it really is, not just the shadows on the wall. He also says that one cannot start this journey without help, someone must release you from your binds in the cave, a teacher if you will. It was thought that philosophers should be the ones to rule the cave dwellers because they have seen where the shadows come from. Do you feel that you have gotten out of the cave? Or that Plato was right in his assumptions?

To people who refer to Plato's Allegory of the Cave I have always been amazed at their lack of comprehension as to what he meant. People love the allegory, it seems not because they understand it, but because it has a mystical quality to it. No matter how simply he explains it, they do not understand the truth of it. Plato discovered what true psychology is. Dialectic is, barring physical dysfunction, the only true form of psycho-therapy that is valid in terms of rational language use. Problem is, I have yet to find anyone who wrote with any understanding of Plato. The theory of forms is based on physical fact--thus it is not a theory at all--it is knowledge, it is wisdom. If you don't understand what I have already written about language then you did not understand Plato. And yes, this is one of the reasons I posted for a mate to write with, to bring dialectic, as Plato outlined it, into common understanding. It is this disparity between what to me is plain and obvious, which can be demonstrated step by step, and has never been developed, that makes me realize that the blindness of man is a real physical limitation. Put youself now, in the Allegory, as one who can see, just how do you explain color to a blind man? This is why I belive that Lucid Dreaming has to be part of the program---the teacher one has there, if their eyes are to be opened, only they can do it. Then, they will be able to comprehend dialectic, which is the only tools used when those eyes are open.

This is what I mean by resident structures in the mind. They must be in place, before understanding what judgment is, and how it is effected can be understood.

As you, people can point to the Alligory of the Cave, but the dialogs, the entire set, is explaining exactly what it means and no one gets it! What greater testimony of blindness can one have?

And Plato was right, you can put the whole of it, the whole of philosphy in one sentence. The whole of psychology, in one sentence--but people can not understand it.

Predication is the inverse function of abstraction.

Its that simple. It means saying what you see, that is why he used obvious examples. It means that the human mind, the way it processes language, must, if it it is functioning correctly, parallel physical reality.

The reason for the Allegory, is itself plain and simple. Each human body life sense system abstracts from the environment. This is why, in the Judeo-Christian scriptures you have several metaphor using the number 7, your body is like a tree of seven branches, each of them abstracting what it takes to live from the environment. Human judgment, what the Bible is about, is one branch that is being developed, but not yet functioning as it should. The ressurrection of the Dead, is the same metaphor as the Allegory of the Cave. Both are different ways of saying the same biological fact. If a human body life sense system is not functioning, one is, by definition, dead--no matter how animated the body is. It is expressed in slang as lights on, but nobody is home.

Plato was not teaching Socrates, he was not treaching Pythagorus. Plato, in order to write as well as he did, to me, could only mean that Plato himself was a prophet. His understanding was not borrowed, he had one of the greatest minds in history. But even my awe and respect for him will not stand in the way of my pointing out a mistake he made in the foundation of Geometry. He enumerated the founation, instead of defining it. This may be why the Delian Problem was never solved and may be why Geometry fragmented into mythical geometries called non-Euiclidean.

So then even in this text you were speaking metaphorically? I interpreted two meanings to what you said. One actualy and one metaphorical.

In response to the realistic meaning: Blind men who became blind after birth know what color is, and can see it in their dreams.

Blind men who were blind before birth on the other hand, do not dream in sight. Their dreams only consist of the other 4 senses they experience in real waking life. So in theory, whether using LD's or any other method it would be impossible to ever teach a blind man what color is to where he could fully comprehend.

Yes, the minds of some men cannot be opened. Even Christ told you this when he said the poor will always be with you.

Don't worry about what I said. Just keep working on Lucid dreaming.

If your reffering to me im humbly waiting for you to do the opening. As far as the metaphoric reference that i get out of it, you are saying some people spend their whole lives in the dark in ignorance of the light? That some people won't accept nor give a second thought to anything out of the norm. Is that close? If not, then explain what the meaning is. What do you mean by some minds can not be opened? Opened to what?

It is not just some, I am afraid. You see, before man was put a Book. It is actually a psychological test of the functioning of the human mind. It is written in that Book that someday man will start to see it, and everything written about it will be nothing. It is quite an incredible work.

Reasoning is a craft, and like any craft it takes a certain amount of "understanding" to master. You can teach two people the same craft--its mechanics, one will say, I have no idea what to build, the other will make a monument that lasts for centuries. That is just the facts of life.

Or again, take a rubber band. One will break it, another will make a powered child's toy from it. I cannot change that.

In my experience I see others labor over detailed plans for a piece of furniture trying to build that piece, yet I throw pre drawn plans aside jot down a stick drawing with a very few measurements and seeimingly effortlessly produce a really fine piece of furniture "off the top of my head".

Same hold true for building something mechanical or restoring a piece of machinery. I "see" the end product before it is ever started upon. Its always been that way even since childhood.

Is this an indication of such presence of reasoning craft as you are speaking of?

If so, then there is more that can be than just simply using what is there right? Such "craft" can be cultivated for even more?

Some people are very good at visualizing in the mind. Often when I make things, its the same way, its in the head. I remember when I was a kid, and my mom would want to rearrange furniture, she would want something somewhere, and I would say, can't you see it wont fit? Nope, she has to have it put there to see.

Its the same when you take things apart and put them together, a lot of people just cannot remember the sequence.

i wonder if the ability to prozess information will make us, some day, happy... that you are, as you should knew