Thread: Why WILD is uncertain method

Originally Posted by ThreeCat

I wonder what some of our proficient WILDers would think about this (sivason, Sageous, anotherdreamer--if I left you out, no offense). "Waiting around" for another REM period seems suspect to me, though Daniel Love recommends this in his book. I am guessing it is really a matter of attention. If you are sble to maintain focus throughout yhe transition, shouldn't be a big deal. Also, isnt the NREM barrier super thin in the morning? Almost all of my WILDs have occurred early/late morning, with an almost automatic drop into REM.

Whatever problems someone might have getting past the NREM barrier in WILD are miniscule in comparison to the problems inherent to DILD.

Originally Posted by cmind

Whatever problems someone might have getting past the NREM barrier in WILD are miniscule in comparison to the problems inherent to DILD.

Then why are DILDs more common?

Originally Posted by ThreeCat

Then why are DILDs more common?

I doubt successful DILDs are more common. But why do more people try to DILD than WILD? A few reasons:

1) The way lucid dreaming is usually described in common parlance is actually a DILD. "Realize that you're dreaming while you're in a dream". This is precisely what a DILD is, and most people aren't even aware that there's this whole other set of techniques called WILD that operate on a fundamentally different principle.

2) For those who know about WILD, it sounds scarier. It's true, the transition between wake and sleep can be compared to a very intense drug experience. However, it's usually very short and it's not scary while you're actually doing it. Furthermore, people may associate WILD with sleep paralysis, which is a common myth but is incorrect.

3) People who are interested in lucid dreaming might find the whole "all day awareness" thing with DILD to be more aesthetically pleasing. It's more "spiritual" or some bullshit.

Now, why is WILD superior?

1) You're starting from a position of strength; of full awareness. DILD requires you to start from a position of weakness, when you're totally non-lucid, and then somehow become lucid. This is exactly akin to a schizophrenic person curing themselves of their delusions without any outside help. It's a big feat, but not attainable by most people.

2) WILD does not require any daytime activities. None of this "reality checking" silliness that DILD people like to make themselves do.

3) If you want to chain lucid dreams, you're going to have to WILD anyway. So might as well just WILD to begin with.

You're obviously very opinionated about this, cmind, and write from the perspective of "having it all figured out," but keep in mind that just because you've come up with a mindset or explanation that makes sense to you, doesn't mean that it's "truth," or that it applies to everybody (or anybody). I think you have acquired a number of misconceptions along the way.

One could very well state that DILD is approaching LDing from a position of strength compared to WILD, considering you're already asleep and dreaming when you DILD, and that WILDs (traditional full WILDs, not DEILDs) are "weak" because you're missing the element of sleep and dreams entirely.

That would not be an entirely accurate statement, either, though. Because lucidity requires that multiple things all come together, namely, sleep and self-awareness. Whether one starts from dreaming sleep and leverages awareness into a DILD, or whether one starts from self-aware waking consciousness and attempts to add the element of sleep and dreaming, you always, unavoidably, must incorporate the other (along with all the secondary but important points like intention, expectation, etc.).

Now before you say "it's clearly superior to start from waking self-awareness and add sleep and dreaming" to reach a LD, remember that you can only ever speak about yourself. Some people seem to have a knack for (full) WILDs, and some have more success with DILDs.

I think it's interesting to note that even experienced LDers (anecdotally, I have not done a formal study) do in fact seem able to DILD at much higher frequency than they WILD.

Point by point:

1) The way lucid dreaming is usually described in common parlance is actually a DILD. "Realize that you're dreaming while you're in a dream". This is precisely what a DILD is, and most people aren't even aware that there's this whole other set of techniques called WILD that operate on a fundamentally different principle.

I knew about both from the beginning. I think most who seriously study LDing, who search out and discover quality resources know about both from the start. In fact, I would say that more casual LD attempters know more about WILD because they hear about this "miraculous" way to have "LDs on demand," and they think the term "WILD" is "cool." Just look at all the beginners (wasting their time IMO) on reddit trying to get FILD to work and get upset that it doesn't work within 1 or 2 days. (I don't think their wasting their time because "FILD sucks" or anything, but because they have not done enough research into LD practice and are missing the fundamentals).

2) For those who know about WILD, it sounds scarier. It's true, the transition between wake and sleep can be compared to a very intense drug experience. However, it's usually very short and it's not scary while you're actually doing it. Furthermore, people may associate WILD with sleep paralysis, which is a common myth but is incorrect.

I did serious background reading and never once held this point of view (that it's scary).

3) People who are interested in lucid dreaming might find the whole "all day awareness" thing with DILD to be more aesthetically pleasing. It's more "spiritual" or some bullshit.

This is a rather condescending and immature attitude. You don't "get it" personally so you think it's BS.

1) You're starting from a position of strength; of full awareness. DILD requires you to start from a position of weakness, when you're totally non-lucid, and then somehow become lucid. This is exactly akin to a schizophrenic person curing themselves of their delusions without any outside help. It's a big feat, but not attainable by most people.

I've already addressed the the "position of strength" fallacy. Your schizophrenia analogy also does not hold water. Lucidity results from the combination of conditions (sleep, sleep cycle phase, being well-rested) and personal qualities (self-awareness, memory, intention, expectation) and having good/great dream recall. Being conscious and aware in a dream regardless of initiation method in itself is an unnatural act, which is why for the majority of non-naturals (either DILD or WILD practitioners) it takes determined effort and time to develop these qualities and to learn to take advantage of timing. The fact is that the truly expert LD practitioner uses *all* tools at his/her disposal, and learns to adapt the method to the conditions of the moment to maximize LD possibility.

2) WILD does not require any daytime activities. None of this "reality checking" silliness that DILD people like to make themselves do.

That's not true. Successful WILDs benefit from strong self-awareness, intention and expectation, which you work on during the day. I'm quoting Sageous on this and given his background I think I'll side with him on this one. And saying "RCs" are "silly" and unnecessary makes you just sound sort of crazy on this forum.

3) If you want to chain lucid dreams, you're going to have to WILD anyway. So might as well just WILD to begin with.

DEILD is quite a different beast from full WILD. And don't forget the easiest way to DEiLD is to exit from a lucid dream, regardless of how you started the LD. So, you could just as well write "might as well learn to DILD in order to chain lucid dreams."

In summary, it's pretty inaccurate to claim one approach is the only way to the exclusion of all others. Each approach has their advantages and disadvantages, and the expert LD practitioner learns them all and understands when to apply them.