Thread: Morphenius's introduction

Glad to have you here. I remember that discussion. I think it is still going. It is important to always separate the ritual from the reality of dreaming. We create these models or rituals in order to trick ourselves into a slightly abnormal state of consciousness. Sure, the rituals work to induce a lucid dream, but you can't trust them as explanations. Sometimes, people get so caught up in their particular model that they start to mistake it for reality.

For example, I might imagine a giant orange octopus pulling me into a dream. It might work to induce a dream, but this does not mean I've discovered that giant orange octopuseseses are the cause of all dreams.

That is the problem I have when people like Newport start overexplaining their lucid induction tricks. They start to become limited by the models they have created.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

Glad to have you here. I remember that discussion. I think it is still going. It is important to always separate the ritual from the reality of dreaming. We create these models or rituals in order to trick ourselves into a slightly abnormal state of consciousness. Sure, the rituals work to induce a lucid dream, but you can't trust them as explanations. Sometimes, people get so caught up in their particular model that they start to mistake it for reality.

For example, I might imagine a giant orange octopus pulling me into a dream. It might work to induce a dream, but this does not mean I've discovered that giant orange octopuseseses are the cause of all dreams.

That is the problem I have when people like Newport start overexplaining their lucid induction tricks. They start to become limited by the models they have created.

True. I try to see the functional value in what someone offers in the way of techniques. I figure that the real reasons it works can emerge at some point as new information presents itself.

I've not had enough time to test Newport's methods thoroughly, but the overlap with Jeff777's tutorial so far does seem quite on. I've felt the wave of paralysis come over me twice now. (Both times I've started moving before it finishes, though, because I find that my tongue is blocking my airway.)

I'm reminded of neuro-linguistic programming (NLP). Much of what Richard Bandler and John Grinder developed in terms of theory is just wrong, we now know, but that doesn't stop the adoption of the theory from producing some rather profound results. Sometimes it's helpful to adopt a theory one logically knows is flawed simply because it works in certain contexts.

But at the same time, I agree with spaceexplorer in that it's a bad idea to deceive people without some kind of fair disclaimer. Bandler and Grinder were upfront with the fact that what they were offering was functionality rather than truth.

Thank you for your welcome!