Lucid Dreamers and God

For those who wish to discuss the purely scientific aspects of sleep and dreams, including new research and future technologies.

Have you ever tried to communicate with God in the phase state (LD/OOBE/AP)?

Yes, and I was successful
3
7%
Yes, but nothing happened
2
4%
Yes, but what was encountered was a product of my mind
5
11%
No, but I am willing to try
21
47%
No, and I'm reluctant to try out of fear
0
No votes
No, and I never will (I'm an atheist who doesn't see any point)
14
31%
 
Total votes: 45

Philosopher8659
Posts: 128
Joined: 14 Feb 2015 07:14
Location: Michigan

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby Philosopher8659 » 22 Feb 2015 05:31

You should teach yourself the principles of language itself. You just stated a self referential fallacy. Common grammar is a logic, this means that the analog component resides with the reader for understanding.
That is why people don't get writers like Plato, or the source of the Judeo-Christian Scripture, or even mathematics for that matter.

Lucid Dreams, on the other hand, is an analog language, one has to have a certain degree of rationality to actually comprehend it as a language.

Both branches of language are interdependent, the principles of which you will find in no author today, except those who pair the analog with the logical, i.e. a formal system, as Euclid attempted, and as I demonstrate in my novels.

Those who are truly linguistically incompetent, don't get it no matter how it is said. The very fact that the analog component of common grammar is in the most rudimentary stages of standardization, demonstrates, or proves, mankind is proto-linguistic.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3639
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby Summerlander » 22 Feb 2015 13:34

Yaweh has joined this debate with his circular logic, deschainXIX! ^^ :-D

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
nesgirl
Posts: 1278
Joined: 25 May 2014 23:10

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby nesgirl » 22 Feb 2015 18:24

...
Last edited by nesgirl on 20 May 2015 01:11, edited 1 time in total.
Goodbye forever...
I dare you Summer and Deschain, to find where I am hiding, and try to attack.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3639
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby Summerlander » 23 Feb 2015 12:03

There is no God. :mrgreen:

Philosopher is one of those people who finds patterns; connects dots; observes the utility of people, animals, and things; and then uses this to reinforce his teleological delusions. He is the sort of person who looks at geometrical wonders - such as Euclid's Orchard - which to me are nothing but great mathematical art and utilities, and deems them to allude to some kind of ultimate godly order. He is swayed by some kind of mathematical pantheism and lost in his own metaphorical gobbledygook. Earth calling Philosopher!

He is no different to some who occasionally experience numinous lucid dreams and mistake that for divine revelation. Lucid dreaming can be a useful tool and a source of creativity. Nothing more.

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

Philosopher8659
Posts: 128
Joined: 14 Feb 2015 07:14
Location: Michigan

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby Philosopher8659 » 23 Feb 2015 13:38

Summerlander wrote:There is no God. :mrgreen:

Philosopher is one of those people who finds patterns; connects dots; observes the utility of people, animals, and things; and then uses this to reinforce his teleological delusions. He is the sort of person who looks at geometrical wonders - such as Euclid's Orchard - which to me are nothing but great mathematical art and utilities, and deems them to allude to some kind of ultimate godly order. He is swayed by some kind of mathematical pantheism and lost in his own metaphorical gobbledygook. Earth calling Philosopher!

He is no different to some who occasionally experience numinous lucid dreams and mistake that for divine revelation. Lucid dreaming can be a useful tool and a source of creativity. Nothing more.

[ Post made via Android ] Image


Quite a mouthful for someone who cannot fault any line of reasoning, equation, or geometrical demonstration that I have done. But, that is the definition of a BS'er, is it not? Someone who engages in character assassination because they cannot actually do a thing about the actual arguments. How pathetic. You must lead a very insecure life. But then, I understand how frightening it is when something is simple and you cannot comprehend it. One tends to act like a mindless animal.

You base your attacks as someone who assumes the whole world is like you, too lazy or too stupid to actually examine the facts, the evidences I have posted online. As you have consistently refused to present any, for you apparently have nothing to show but empty words which only reflect your own pathology.

You apparently never considered, that since the mind is responsible for human behavior, a great deal of what your mind is capable of doing is always reflected in your actions. My cat doesn't consider that either. However, if my cat became aggressive, I would simply let it out into the wild.

The fact that I maintain that a proof is something which simply proofs the use of words back to definitions, is not actually a new idea. Nor is it an irrational one, for, being civil, being linguistic, has never been anything more than the ability to give your word, and keep it. Or, since we are mind, and in a metaphor, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Not magic, nor mysticism, a simple linguistic fact. There is plenty of evidence I tender for my words, thousands of examples where I reduce proofs back to the givens only, so that my equations are, when I can do the reduction, always given solely in terms of the givens, in other words, to first principles. A method I taught myself from the first time I took up the exercise. You will find that it is an ideology quite distinct from Cartesian Geometry, which is always in reference to an arbitrary coordinate system. And even Einstein's dependency on coordinate systems of reference, when anyone linguistic agrees with Plato, the relative difference between things cannot be predicated of either things. Results solely in terms of the givens are independent of arbitrary coordinate systems of reference, an idea science has yet to comprehend and master.
And the fact that I can demonstrate linguistic facts about the Judeo-Christian Scripture does not imply that my mind is weaker than yours, not by a long shot, and not by your method of demonstrating just how weak your mind is.
You certainly can carve a boat with an ax, or you can manufacture one according to standards. One of them, however, will definitely not break arctic ice, nor float an army in your defense.

The whole idea, that the mind is responsible for human behavior, and that it is wholly linguistic by function and fact, and that true psychotherapy relies on this fact, is not only the foundation of the Judeo-Christian Scripture, but also the Platonic Dialogs. It is also the foundation of reason itself. Proof is always the ability to demonstrate that "line must be upon line, and precept upon precept." Not mysticism, not magic, but a true religious function of mind. The reason you cannot resolve many examples to the one idea, is because you are incapable of seeing the idea to begin with. Not even a child can group what it cannot grasp--but it often has a tantrum blaming the blocks.

As counting developed by grouping via a standard of perceptible objects, it expands to grouping by the intelligible, which is simply beyond some. We really have not strayed far from the crib after all. But don't have a panic attack, just keep working on it. Logics, after all, are only methods of indexing and manipulating memory. If you don't have the memory, well, nice house, but nobody home again. Give your linguists a ton more grants, and they just might some day figure that out. After all, what have they said about a monkey and a typewrite? Give these guys more paper and ink! However, if you really don't believe that we live by chance, maybe it is true, someone would be sent to teach man about Law, the principles of language itself.

It is no accident that language consists of two fundamental branches. For a mind they amount to the indexing system and the material indexed. Logic and Analogic. Two Branches of Law. Both derived from one and the same thing, i.e., a perfect match between them. neither of them alone, can be called language. However, you do have two branches of language because one can take either one as a given, and the other must be a product of mental crafting.

This pattern might be recognized by anyone familiar with the workings of a computer.

When comparing two things, one compares the definition of the things themselves, not when they were written, not the use of language to write them in, not the mythology associated with the thing. Damn. If you cannot compare them, then show some sense, check the content of your own hard drive. If it is empty, then don't pretend you can do the impossible or that your ignorance really is bliss.

Now, I realize you are not taught this in school, but if it was, if man had the wit to figure it out, there would be no need of what is actually written in the Book.

Some have asked, why do I bother with people who are really thick. I learned how to solve the Delian Problem because it was said impossible. Granted it took me 10 years, much of that time working 12 hours a day, 7 days a week in a factory, and granted most will not even look at it because of the bad rep it has in history, and others simply do not comprehend the solution and there may be some, that if they accept the solution, that the foundation of language rests on definition, they would be out of a job with a history of personal incompetence tacked on to it. But the more difficult the task, the more one is apt to learn. I learned enough from it to develop a new branch of Basic Analog Mathematics, which some have sought for from almost the start of formal geometry.
There is an old ancient saying, hard is the good.

As the mind is wholly linguistic by function, a sane approach to problem solving is to strive for the linguistic competence for the task. I would never have even considered reading the Book, had not my teacher in the lucid dream state given me a certain reply to a certain question. A question in regard to the function of lucid dreams themselves. My first reaction to the Book was that it was rubbish, but it only took a moment of reflection to see language used in a way I was unfamiliar with, language that required whole linguistic processing. Most of it is beyond me, but the easier parts, which others could not see, all say the same thing, learn how to do our own work as mind.

A correct education then consists in the perfection, understanding, and maintenance of the indexing systems of the mind, i.e. Logic, and the material indexed, experience, i.e., Analogic. Ordered experience is best learned by learning real hands on and functional crafts. One of the simplest, and most economical, is simply geometry.

In vague terms, language and culture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xai6s0AEyYc

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3639
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby Summerlander » 23 Feb 2015 21:31

Character assassination? Is that how you feel? Wow! :mrgreen:

I'm sorry, but, I also don't know what I'm supposed to present. From where I'm standing, you are the one making claims to knowledge that most don't possess because apparently we are all proto-linguistic. I confess that I didn't even check your links. Do you know why? The ignorance transuding from your badly constructed posts put me off. :mrgreen:

Seriously, though, your presentation is terrible apart from your anti-scientific views, Judeo-Christian recommendations, and casuistry. If you are really onto something, and I got you completely wrong, prove me wrong. Why not go for the Nobel Prize, eh? ;-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
nesgirl
Posts: 1278
Joined: 25 May 2014 23:10

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby nesgirl » 24 Feb 2015 02:06

...
Last edited by nesgirl on 20 May 2015 01:11, edited 1 time in total.
Goodbye forever...
I dare you Summer and Deschain, to find where I am hiding, and try to attack.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3639
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby Summerlander » 06 May 2015 00:03

Lucid dreaming can be useful in many ways. Escapism is one of them. And yes, you are quite right in saying that dream people are just that... dream people. They are just mental creations. Illusions. Not real.

Some people believe that if both science and religion admit to being agnostic on the question of God, it'll settle the debate. This is a naive statement. As Dawkins pointed out, the atheist is right because he knows the odds on God -- the same as the fairy's or the unicorn's. No reason to believe in such things. The agnostic, like the theist, is also wrong. Why? Because agnosticism erroneously thinks that God is a 50-50 scenario. It isn't. God is more like 99% improbable. The 1% wouldn't house an Abrahamic interfering god either for the Creator proposed by deism is a better candidate.

And while agnostics are more prone to fall for the ridiculous Pascal's wager, the deist has all his work ahead of him. In (honest) scientific circles, God remains a tenuous hypothesis as opposed to a rich and compelling theory. (So is the flying pig.) The atheist takes these important factors into account and for that he holds best and most reasonable position in this discourse. It isn't about compromise between science and religion, or secularists and the pious. It is about having an honest discussion where we uphold observable facts and jettison ridiculous assertions. To believe in anything without a shred of evidence is irrational.

[EDITED]

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
buildit
Posts: 491
Joined: 23 Sep 2014 04:14
Location: USA

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby buildit » 16 May 2015 15:31

So just to pour fuel on the fire, Dawkins, Krauss and Bill Nye all admit science can never disprove God. The best science can do is prove he is not needed to produce the universe which we see. :D
Is Lucid Dreaming the brains preparation for the next step of human evolution when we can escape the corporeal bond of our bodies?

User avatar
HAGART
Posts: 3179
Joined: 05 Jan 2012 21:09
Location: CANADA

Re: Lucid Dreamers and God

Postby HAGART » 16 May 2015 16:51

I'm proud to be agnostic despite Summerlander's criticism.

I think the Bible, the Torah, and the Qur'an are all works of fiction, made by leaders to control to populous.

But there's still a 'je ne sais quoi' about everything and if you ask 'why' over and over again, you reach a point where the entire universe and our existence doesn't makes sense. There's a missing puzzle piece and I don't know what it is, but I can 'salsa dance with my own confusion', and be aware of it and although it's hard, it's the path I chose.

Being atheist/agnostic is so hard when you don't have faith in all the answers, and only find solace in further questions that beget no answers in an endless cycle.

But that's the nature of the universe and reality, isn't it?
If we all lucid dreamed this world would be a better place.


Return to “Dream Science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests