Ah.... everybody thinking that they are right... in reality, it doesn't matter as long as it works for you... if it does, you really shouldn't give a flying shit.
Printable View
Ah.... everybody thinking that they are right... in reality, it doesn't matter as long as it works for you... if it does, you really shouldn't give a flying shit.
Dude... give it up already. I never claimed to possess inner peace and I don't want inner peace so quit trying to sell it to me. If Iwant to hear about love and compassion and the such I'll go to church.
And I already told you i know that DC's are reflections of me. Who knows me better than me? Already knowing this, I know my DCs would never surrender to something as stupid as a hug. They'd probably kick the crap out of me for being such a weenie.
And don't tell me I don't have patience. If I didn't have patience I'd have told you to take your hippy shit and shove it where the sun don't shine the first time I replied to you. The fact that Im here now responding, yet again, though you seem to not be listening to me proves beyond all doubt that I posess patience.
Bad dreams? I rarely have them. They seemed to have withered and died after I started seriously attempting to lucid dream. I have odd and uncomfortable dreams but nothing that really frightens me. In this past year Ive claimed back more of my sanity than ever I have in all the years of counilling I endured. My way works for me. I'll stick with it.
What you seem to consider as a peaceful approach towards dealing with negativity sounds like submission. I'm not submitting to any DC if I can help it. Sorry if I don't subscribe to your wimpy ways of dealing with things. If you have that much calm and control in dreams... yay for you. Most of us don't have that and will have to face our demons in other ways. I'm not not you. I do not handle situations the way you do. I don't want to handle dreams the way you do. I don't want to be you. Take your peace and love and sell it to people who buy that stuff.
And just for your information... I WILL KEEP KILLING. But not because you told me to. I'll do it because I want to, because I like it and because it's a nessesary part of my dreaming experience at this point in my life. I stand firm that killing DC's isn't wrong. Stop trying to drag morals and rules into a world where such things are made to be broken. If you live your dreams as though they were waking life... i pity you. You're missing out on some truly great and indescribable experiences.
Why do people feel it's nessesary to ruin something amazing like LDing by trying to chain us down with rules? Don't oppress me!!!! :bigteeth:
*EDIT*
Hey. I AM right.
However I deal with my dreams and DC's is right for me. I'm speaking for myself and my personal situation. And that's what I've been trying to say all along. HIs ways are as wrong for me as my ways are wrong for him.
My dreams. My solutions work best for me. That's all there is to it.
And I'm not trying to be better than him.
Don't havet to try.
I already know I am.
heh heh ;)
I choose to have my morals. They are one thing that only humans have, and someone without morals cant truly know what it is like to be human
"Within rules, there is FREEDOM!"
I will always be me, and I will always act in the manner I deem right. Murder for not reason is not just, and I will have no part of it.
As long as I am Me, I will do what is right
I think killing innocent DC's is wrong, but demons, evil spirits, and human DC's who wrong me or others are fair game to be destroyed.
I don't do anything wrong in the real world. but even I get stress, I need to vent my anger on something, and I don't plan on doing it to anything real anytime soon.
I just had a dream (normal) where I was fighting, I don't even know who it was...
....but damn it was exhilarating!
I choose freedom tooQuote:
Why do people feel it's nessesary to ruin something amazing like LDing by trying to chain us down with rules? Don't oppress me!!!![/b]
But your not truly free because your following rules i.e. somebody who is following rules cant be free because he cant go against the rule he is following.Quote:
"Within rules, there is FREEDOM!"[/b]
True, its just like a game, if i kill somone i know in real life (in a LD) its the same thing as thinking about it, no worse. No Rules are what i want to LD for, no consequences to our actions.
I don't think we can compare (as discussed earlier) the dreamworld with the waking world, to say that the dream world is real or related to the real world. For many reasons:
• We do not learn morals in the dreamworld, because there they can be warped and changed.
• We cannot bring morals from the waking life into the dreamworld because the dreamworld is different. For a few things, killing a DC may have a different perspective because you can revive them, heal them and turn them into a mouse if you want. :D
• Death also can have different perspectives, for example: In the waking life people die, and we never see or hear from them again, and so we can do nothing about it. But in the dreamworld, it is more by will. We can simply ignore a DC and they will disappear, or "die". But we can bring them back if we want.
• If we do believe morals should be brought into dreams, then should we believe that the laws of physics and nature should be too? Is it wrong to flatten someone paper thin?
• Has anyone had a DC tell them that killing was bad? Actually not many DC's really know how to communicate well, so there's probably nothing important enough to tell. :D
• Most of the time we dream about our own personal situations. So I don't believe these can be part of anyone else in the real world (that's why I don't understand Shared dreaming).
• Also, most points in this post are related with lucid dreams. But what's if we killed in a normal dream? Who will blame someone who is unaware and unconscious every night of their lives? It is only us who will be affected, and we can't help knowing otherwise.
I don't believe it is right or wrong to kill a DC, because there is no loss really, it's just a dream choice. It seems nothing in a dream follows a set of rules. It is only how it affects us, because that's all it is part of. If you think killing is good (in a dream) then do it, if you then find it is bad, reverse the situation - you have control in dreams (if you're lucid of course)!
And we have morals in the real world, because it is real - we don't know what happens when someones time is up (However, we do in a dream :) ), so we wouldn't want to end it, all we know is that they never return.
I think we should ask ourselves, "Why do we find satisfaction through killing?"
Whew, a very big ego here. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vex
I'm just making suggestions. I'm just trying to tell you something you have never considered. It's not a contest here.
But I totally disagree with you on one thing. Being peaceful and serene is not the same as being wimpy. Instead, it takes the most courage to be calm in dire situations. And there's a difference between calmness and cowardice. I guess you don't quite get it. And when you are calm enough, you can actually come up with very creative solutions for many problems in life.
And I don't think I am actually bound by some kind of rules in my dream though. Instead, I have an immense feeling of freedom when I'm roaming in my dreams. I actually have the most control of my dream when I stay calm and peaceful. And it's the same for every lucid dreamer. Being calm and detached is the way to total control of our lucid dreams. It's NOT only a matter of morality. But it seems to me you never would consider alternatives. And this way, you always get the same experience over and over again. That to me is more boring.
Anyway, I respect your choice and your opinions. But somehow you're also not listening.
Haha.
I don't have a big ego. It's a healthy sized ego. BUt I bet you'd disagree with that opinion of mine too.
I consider alternatives. All those rambling posts I wrote were simply me just trying to be as drop dead serious as you about dreaming. And just basically being an ass because it's one of the things I do best.
I do stand by my opinion though. Killing DC's isn't wrong at all. You're waaaaay to serious man. Loosen up and live a little. Stop trying to be the Jesus Christ of Lucid Dreaming... Im already here. :wink:
Anyway, welcome to DV's, since I never said it in the first place.
:bigteeth:
Thanks for welcoming me. It's nice to find an online community of lucid dreaming.
I believe any form of destruction (or killing or death or whatsoever) is not right or wrong in itself. And this is the tao of this universe. No destruction, no rebirth. And the truth is, those who don't mind killing (or even enjoy doing so) are usually the winners or leaders on this planet. Morality breeds losers. I know it all too well.
It's all a matter of choice, and I believe there's no such thing as a superior choice. Both who kill and who let live have very different kinds of satisfactions in what they do. I just happen to be the one who finds the most satisfaction when I see everyone around me is intact and well. Not that I can speak for all though. But I'd like to spread the message of kindness. I don't intend to change everyone, such is a childish and naive thought.
There's a Chinese saying I like so much, which goes literally in English "Embrace the differences". It's kinda difficult but I'm still learning. Cheers.
BTW, I'm not trying to be Jesus. I'm not a fan of him. :)
I'd say the detective died simply because he was less intelligent than the assassin, it's nothing to do with his morality. One could be both peaceful and smart. These are not contradictory qualities. And an assassin could also be very tranquil inside. You know why those good guys are always outsmarted by the bad guys? Because they are less calm than the bad ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by becomingagodo
One couldn't be really intelligent if their minds are not peaceful and tranquil. Inner turmoils simply cloud judgments. And when one attains true inner peace their mind opens up to all possibilities. So, to me inner peace and intelligence go hand in hand.Quote:
I disagree chaos and intelligence is more powerful.[/b]
I disagree well a good example would be van gogh who new that if it wasnt for his mental illness then he wouldnt be half the artist he ended up being. Or Nietzsche when he saidQuote:
One couldn't be really intelligent if their minds are not peaceful and tranquil. Inner turmoils simply cloud judgments. And when one attains true inner peace their mind opens up to all possibilities. So, to me inner peace and intelligence go hand in hand.[/b]
Even your quote embrace the differences should mean you should embrace chaos or you should embrace it as much as traquility.Quote:
One must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star. [/b]
Your assuming intelligence is judgement i could proberly find about 35 people that have superior intelligence but have not got a decent thread of judgement in their body. One other point i thought bhuddish is to know yourself what the quote to know something is knowledge to know yourself is enlightenment, well how do you know your not chaotic yourself because what i see is your surpressing all your emotion or just throwing it away by relaxing yourself at the end of the day your only a animal. This remind me of the film fight club in a scene one of the person get their hand burned by lye so to get rid of pain he did mediation, well the other person who at the end was a hallucination stoped him meditating by pulling him back and said this is your pain. The problem and the main reason i gave bhuddism up is because it neglect reality for inner peace and traquillity, what that saying ignorance is bliss enlightenment is hell.
Embrace the difference or as picasso would say
Quote:
Every act of creation is first an act of destruction. [/b]
Hmm...I thought we were talking about intelligence, not artistic talent. Van Gogh is definitely not intelligent in my book. I'd say he's artistically creative. But so sad he killed himself. Pardon me if I say he's a loser. Yeah, he is forever remembered as one of the greatest artists of all time, but the whole thing still seems pathetic to me. He couldn't even live long enough to enjoy his fame.Quote:
Originally Posted by becomingagodo
As for Nietzsche, I have a great deal of respect for him and he is no doubt one of the greatest philosophers. I admire his courage to speak against religions. I can see the beauty in his thoughts. But at the end of the day it's a matter of what you want to achieve ultimately. His path is just not mine.
Well, I didn't say I wouldn't embrace chaos. One could observe and appreciate chaos and be very tranquil. Again, these are not contradictory qualities. The opposite of chaos is order. I've never said I am pro-order. What I meant was that I do my best to just observe and be detached whenever whatever is happening to me so that I can have a better grasp of the situation. And take brainstorming and creative problem solving as examples, these are very chaotic processes and yet I can remain tranquil and sane, why not? Inner turmoils are what I'm against, not chaos. Chaos could be constructive whereas inner turmoils are negative inner struggles.Quote:
Even your quote embrace the differences should mean you should embrace chaos or you should embrace it as much as traquility.
Your assuming intelligence is judgement i could proberly find about 35 people that have superior intelligence but have not got a decent thread of judgement in their body. One other point i thought bhuddish is to know yourself what the quote to know something is knowledge to know yourself is enlightenment, well how do you know your not chaotic yourself because what i see is your surpressing all your emotion or just throwing it away by relaxing yourself at the end of the day your only a animal. This remind me of the film fight club in a scene one of the person get their hand burned by lye so to get rid of pain he did mediation, well the other person who at the end was a hallucination stoped him meditating by pulling him back and said this is your pain. The problem and the main reason i gave bhuddism up is because it neglect reality for inner peace and traquillity, what that saying ignorance is bliss enlightenment is hell.
Embrace the difference or as picasso would say
[/b]
Granted, chaos and intelligence are powerful. But on top of them there is a pilot called inner peace or tranquility. Without that quality of tranquility being installed in the first place, we end up becoming another Van Gogh -- insane and suicidal.
And to tell you honestly, I NEVER suppress my emotions. Suppressing emotions is very unhealthy. I have actually learned to observe my emotions when they come up and watch them leave. They are not suppressed, but acknowledged and released. I never trap them inside. Yes, emotions could be released in a very quiet and healthy manner. I could also choose to do something really silly or violent to vent my negative emotions, but it is simply unwise and most importantly, INEFFECTIVE. I hope I am now explaining things more clearly to you.
To your surprise, I am not a buddhist. And I've never claimed to be one. My beliefs may cross paths with buddhism but I don't dig everything of it. Buddhism is very passive and laidback and tells people to accept what is, and not to change a thing. My view is to observe what is as detached as possible SO THAT I could change it the way I really want it to with minimum effort. That is the difference between buddhism and what I believe in. To put it in better words, my philosophy is closer to that of Tai Chi.
Okay what about godel he died of a mental illness also he a mathematician so now he highly intelligent or Nash how also is a mathematician but he not dead.Quote:
Hmm...I thought we were talking about intelligence, not artistic talent. Van Gogh is definitely not intelligent in my book. I'd say he's artistically creative. But so sad he killed himself. Pardon me if I say he's a loser. Yeah, he is forever remembered as one of the greatest artists of all time, but the whole thing still seems pathetic to me. He couldn't even live long enough to enjoy his fame. [/b]
I give you that but if you have to surpless the stupid ideas so your really just getting rid of chaos.Quote:
Well, I didn't say I wouldn't embrace chaos. One could observe and appreciate chaos and be very tranquil. Again, these are not contradictory qualities. The opposite of chaos is order. I've never said I am pro-order. What I meant was that I do my best to just observe and be detached whenever whatever is happening to me so that I can have a better grasp of the situation. And take brainstorming and creative problem solving as examples, these are very chaotic processes and yet I can remain tranquil and sane, why not? [/b]
To observe but then your just a rock. The best counter for this would be Heraclitus who that change is fundamental it stabillity that is the illusion which then he came up with his idea of fluxQuote:
To your surprise, I am not a buddhist. And I've never claimed to be one. My beliefs may cross paths with buddhism but I don't dig everything of it. Buddhism is very passive and laidback and tells people to accept what is, and not to change a thing. My view is to observe what is as detached as possible SO THAT I could change it the way I really want it to with minimum effort. That is the difference between buddhism and what I believe in. To put it in better words, my philosophy is closer to that of Tai Chi.[/b]
See by staying the same your not truly working with the universe. Well you do seem really smart i could even say your the smartest person who knows philosophy i have talked to, which is kind of depressing. However if you dont see your flaw i will talk about quantum mechainics and how your truly observing nothing.Quote:
He is famous for (allegedly) expressing the notion that no man can cross the same river twice:
"Ποταμοῖς τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἐμβαίνομέν τε καὶ οὐκ ἐμβαίνομεν, εἶμέν τε καὶ οὐκ εἶμεν."
"We both step and do not step in the same rivers. We are and are not."
The idea of the logos is also credited to him, as he proclaims that everything originates out of the logos. Further, Heraclitus said "I am as I am not", and "He who hears not me but the logos will say: All is one." Heraclitus held that an explanation of change was foundational to any theory of nature. This view was strongly opposed by Parmenides, who said that reality was permanent and unchanging. According to Lavine, Parmenides asked, "How can a thing change into something else? How can it be and not be?" According to Parmenides, change is merely an illusion.[3]
His promotion of change also led Heraclitus to believe that conflict (e.g., ἀγών agon in Greek) is necessary for change to occur and to argue against Homer: "War is the father of all and the king of all" and "Every animal is driven to pasture with a blow."
His view on the random chance inherent in the universe is famously the direct opposite of Einstein's (in which he stated "God does not play dice with the universe"): "Time is a child moving counters in a game; the kingly power is a child's."[/b]
I have to agree with that. I have had two dreams (non-LD and LD) where I remained calm and allowed the DC's to attack me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus
In the non-LD, I was lying on the ground, allowing a DC to cut through my flesh with a large knife for quite a time, and after a while I took a hold of his neck, crushed him with my hand and threw his corpse away.
In the LD I was in a fight with some dream characters. One of them threw a molotov cocktail towards me but missed, and I stepped into the fire that came from the molotov completely naked to prove my strenght, and afterwards I finished them off, of course.
I think you missed the point
I agreed that being calm does not equal to cowardice. Edited my post to clarify.
And the point is? OK, these people are highly intelligent and their minds are really "chaotic" at some points in their lives. They may not have the peace of mind but still they have achieved a great deal, is that what you're trying to say? But let me ask you a question. How would you know that they wouldn't have achieved EVEN MORE if they had been more serene and detached in their researches? How would you know that they wouldn't be more successful if they had practiced a little "let go and let God"? We never know.Quote:
Originally Posted by becomingagodo
You have not proven to me that having a chaotically intelligent mind is superior to having a tranquil mind. I can also quote Ghandi as an example to show that a tranquil mind can achieve the great. Who dare say that Ghandi's achievements are less worthy than Nash's?
Check my words:Quote:
To observe but then your just a rock. The best counter for this would be Heraclitus who that change is fundamental it stabillity that is the illusion which then he came up with his idea of flux[/b]
My view is to observe what is as detached as possible SO THAT I could change it the way I really want it to with minimum effort.
I've never said I wouldn't take action. I only meant that I'd take the most efficient action, keeping my effort minimal. I am just against wasting excessive energy. To observe doesn't mean sitting still like a rock, who gave you this idea? When one can observe the whole picture calmly, one knows WHEN and HOW to take the MOST APPROPRIATE and EFFECTIVE action. I'm just against the idea of chopping the door open when I can just open it with a tiny key.
My attitude remains the same, but my reactions are not. I may treat every situation with the same attitude (that I'm detached and try not to get emotionally involved), but that doesn't mean that I always take the same action. For example, my attitude towards my friends and family remain the same (I love them all), but that doesn't mean I treat everyone the same way. I do whatever I see fit for anyone and everyone. And I can do so very well because I have done my KEEN OBSERVATIONS.Quote:
See by staying the same your not truly working with the universe. Well you do seem really smart i could even say your the smartest person who knows philosophy i have talked to, which is kind of depressing. However if you dont see your flaw i will talk about quantum mechainics and how your truly observing nothing.
[/b]
You don't need to throw everything you know in my face to show your profound knowledge in philosophy. I know where you're coming from and I'm just not your kind of people. I dislike philosophical discussions, and I have never been an avid philosophy student. I don't claim to understand Aristotle and Plato. I am simply sharing my views which are apparently very different from quite a few people here. Well, it's nice to stretch our minds once in a while though.
And why are you trying to "make me see my flaws"? Of course there are flaws. I don't think anyone can come up with any theory that is so flawless that no one can challenge. If there's such a thing as a "flawless theory" then philosophy is meaningless. Everything can be argued and doubted. What you said have flaws too. I don't claim that I am flawless in what I say. I am just sharing my belief, and there is no such thing as "a flaw in a belief". We believe what we want to believe, flawed or flawless. We share our beliefs with others because we have benefit from our beliefs and we want to share it with others. And even a so-called "flawed belief" could serve some positive purpose. Simple as that. Again, you don't need to agree with me.
Well you misinterprete me i meant that you think and can reason good.Quote:
You don't need to throw everything you know in my face to show your profound knowledge in philosophy. I know where you're coming from and I'm just not your kind of people. I dislike philosophical discussions, and I have never been an avid philosophy student. I don't claim to understand Aristotle and Plato. I am simply sharing my views which are apparently very different from quite a few people here. Well, it's nice to stretch our minds once in a while though.[/b]
I disagree. Well their a greate psychologist Boris sidis who is the farther of the smartest person who ever lived. Well he argued that the cause of all our problem is not thinking and that to truly achieve something you need to reason throught it and push against your exhaustion. See the brain cannot get tired and everytime we use it we take away neurological energy as this decreases you take energy from static or reserve energy. Well he said that if you can tap this energy you will be superior intellectually to other people well the proof is in his son who is considered a genius among geniuses. The more energy you use the more neurones you our using, well i think using more of the brain is better then using less. Althought reasoing is the most improtant factor and controlling your consciousness.Quote:
I've never said I wouldn't take action. I only meant that I'd take the most efficient action, keeping my effort minimal. I am just against wasting excessive energy. To observe doesn't mean sitting still like a rock, who gave you this idea? When one can observe the whole picture calmly, one knows WHEN and HOW to take the MOST APPROPRIATE and EFFECTIVE action. I'm just against the idea of chopping the door open when I can just open it with a tiny key.[/b]
i am doing the opposite to what you suggest well i am trying to force my consiousness to control everything and instead of using less of my brain i am using more.
Well the best example is using a laptop to do stuff when you can use a supercomputer. Yes the laptop can conserve more energy but the power source is so vast that even if you did use the supercomputer it would never run out.
Well this gave me the idea that perfect observation means a rock
http://www.plotinus.com/zhine_tibetan_dream_yoga.htm
When a child learns to walk he doesnt just look and them start walking he has to strain his mind to get the abillity to walk then it becomes second nature. The point is without dispencing large sums of energy you wont achieve anything worth achieveing i.e. you wont walk.
I would rather have nothing then something flawed. I got some art homework that i need doing so i would try your least energy theory with boris sidis reserve energy and see what works best.Quote:
And even a so-called "flawed belief" could serve some positive purpose. Simple as that. Again, you don't need to agree with me.[/b]
you would rather have nothing then something flawed?
Every house has leeks
Every Car has dents
Every life as Freeks
And not every room has vents
Every book a tear
Every shoe has wear
Not every clock stricks true
Not even the parts of you
OMG.... the things I could pick apart... :lol:
Lets get this back on track before this thread gets moved to the philosophy forum.
Is it right to kill a DC?
Yes.
Especially if it deserves it.
okay
is it right to kill a DC?
No
why?
because murder without cause is wrong
Nine more post and i would have beaten the is having sex in lucid dream considered cheating.
Yes but how can you murder something that doesnt exsist.Quote:
okay
is it right to kill a DC?
No
why?
because murder without cause is wrong[/b]
You can see them, feel them, hear them and smell them. Who knows, maby you can even taste them.
Point is, to your mind and sences, they are real. Everything you do to them is an act they will feel and respond to, just like a real person.
Do you see where I am going with this?
Yes but their not real.Quote:
You can see them, feel them, hear them and smell them. Who knows, maby you can even taste them.
Point is, to your mind and sences, they are real. Everything you do to them is an act they will feel and respond to, just like a real person.
Do you see where I am going with this?[/b]