Lucid Dreaming

[Z]

Susan Blackmore says:



It seems clearly the case that I have been misusing the word consciousness all my life. I understand it as being aware . . having thoughts, feelings, qualia etc. That which distinguishes oneself from being unconscious or being dead (if you don't believe in life after death).

But with normal dreams you are not conscious, but with dreams you are conscious?? Er . .the only distinction between them is that in the latter you realise you are dreaming! But I can't believe my understanding of the word "consciousness" can be so much in error that the word actually means the realisation that you are not dreaming! But yet all the skeptics on here agree with Susan Blackmore about the definition of the word.

Anyone help me out here?

It's not at all unlikely that you are wrong about your definition for 'conscious' - considering you are wrong on many other definitions as well.

Consciousness takes many forms - many degrees. Lucidity in a dream is a form of lesser consciousness - just as lucidity during wakefulness is a greater form of consciousness. Consider: not everyone who is awake is at the same level of 'consciousness'. Many merely 'go through the motions', while others take note of every detail of their experience. There could well be considered to be 'lucid wakefulness' vs. normal wakefulness!

Anyway, yeah, you're wrong again on a definition. No surprise, and no insult intended. Language is not your strong suit, Ian.

 

[Interesting Ian]

conscious. adj.
Having an awareness of one's environment and one's own existence, sensations, and thoughts

Yes, so why does this exclude normal dreams? If you're saying ones dream environment is not "real", then what does "real" mean in this context? I'm an immaterialist meaning I do not believe in the existence of a material world. If I am correct, does this mean that none of us are conscious? Does this mean the term consciousness is redundant under philosophical subjective idealism? If so what word should we substitute for "Having an awareness of one's environment and one's own existence, sensations, and thoughts"?

 

[Interesting Ian]

It's not at all unlikely that you are wrong about your definition for 'conscious' - considering you are wrong on many other definitions as well.

Consciousness takes many forms - many degrees. Lucidity in a dream is a form of lesser consciousness - just as lucidity during wakefulness is a greater form of consciousness. Consider: not everyone who is awake is at the same level of 'consciousness'. Many merely 'go through the motions', while others take note of every detail of their experience. There could well be considered to be 'lucid wakefulness' vs. normal wakefulness!

Anyway, yeah, you're wrong again on a definition. No surprise, and no insult intended. Language is not your strong suit, Ian.

Not according to the definition that Placebo quoted. Can you give a reference to a definition of consciousness which explicitly states it is different from merely having experiences, thoughts, emotions, and qualia? I submit that you skeptics and Susan Blackmore are in fact using a incorrect definition of consciousness.

But prove me wrong and I shall acknowledge it.

 

[Interesting Ian]

While that is sensibly true (without a physical body, why would we have the restriction of 180 degree vision?), it is also consistant with a dream-state - that is, that so-called OBE's and NDE's are merely dreams.

Frankly, omni-vision is proof neither way - all it proves is whatever IS going on is not tied to the physical sensory organs at all. Whether dream or spirit remains to be proven/disproven.

Why do we have omnivision if it is your brain creating the environment? We know that our dreams are kinda like copying real life. Congenitally blind people don't see in their dreams for example*. So those who are not blind you would expect their vision in a dream to be like normal vision. Indeed I believe mine is (although never remember my dreams now).

* Although research suggests that congenitally blind people who have NDEs are able to perceive their environment during an OBE stage. (see Mindsight by Kenneth Ring and Sharon Cooper)

 

[Beth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

Beth,

I was speaking broadly about consciousness. I was not meaning to distinguish between humans and other animals but merely commenting about the process of evolution across the board. And I didn't mention self-consciousness for no other reason that it was not pertinent to my point which I wished to state as simply as possible. But the process would look like this:

unconsciousness => consciousness => self-consciousness

Some forms of life have not progressed beyond the unconsciousness stage because there was no pressure to evolve consciousness. Other forms of life have progressed all the way to self-consciousness because the environment in which they found themselves was a very competitive one and self-consciousness was a survival advantage.

But maybe I missed the point you were trying to make.

BillyJoe

You were saying that sleeping 7 hours out of 24 is an evolutionary advantage over sleeping 24 out of 24 - i.e. and animal without any type consciousness such as a bacterium or amoeba. This doesn't make sense to me because only more evolved animals sleep. Birds and mammals sleep, but only mammals dream (and not mammals at that but very nearly all). I don't think that fish sleep, I'm not sure about reptiles such as snakes. I think that amphibians (at least some of them) sleep. I haven't a clue about insects.

However, I would be rather loath to say that fish are never conscious (i.e. sleeping 24 hours a day) compared to a bird, which does sleep. To me, this would imply that consciousness evolved before sleep did, not that sleep is a return to the sort of unconsciousness experienced 24 hours a day by animals that don't sleep.

 

[Placebo]

From Interesting Ian regarding OBE/NDE
So basically you're asking a very involved question which would take us off the subject matter of this thread

No not at all, you provided my answers
I did not require an essay, just your fundamental view on it.

From Interesting Ian
Can you give a reference to a definition of consciousness which explicitly states it is different from merely having experiences, thoughts, emotions, and qualia? I submit that you skeptics and Susan Blackmore are in fact using a incorrect definition of consciousness.

The thing is that consciousness is not very well understood by science yet.
However the difference between a normal dream and a lucid dream is that in the normal dream you are not aware of your thoughts, in the sense of questioning them for example.
You are not aware of the waking world whilst in that dream world (meant as the world we partake of in the waking hours)
Personally I believe it may be linked to your ability to reason and question your surroundings and yourself. One does not generally do this in a normal dream. Pink elephants are normal in normal dreams.

From Interesting Ian
Why do we have omnivision if it is your brain creating the environment? We know that our dreams are kinda like copying real life. Congenitally blind people don't see in their dreams for example

Good point. However the difference is that omnivision is simply a modification of vision.
The gap between being blind and seeing is far larger than pasting together multiple vision views into one perception.

From Interesting Ian
The anecdotal evidence pretty well overwhelmingly suggests they are not wholly hallucinatory

Which particular anecdotal evidence are you referring to?

 

[Z]

Anecdotal evidence is rarely worth much, when one starts examining it critically.

And omnivision occurs more often in dreams than many people realize, because they are so used to assuming normal 180 degree vision. But, certainly, there is nothing within a dream to prevent you from having omnivision other than your own cognizance of the unlikelihood of doing so.

BTW, it seems blind people do occasionally dream of vision, though congenitally blind people generally don't understand that this is what they are experiencing. After all, someone who has never seen lacks the ability to associate experience with language to TELL us that they have 'seen' within the dream.

 

[BillyJoe]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

Beth,

You were saying that sleeping 7 hours out of 24 is an evolutionary advantage over sleeping 24 out of 24 - i.e. and animal without any type consciousness such as a bacterium or amoeba. This doesn't make sense to me because only more evolved animals sleep. Birds and mammals sleep, but only mammals dream (and not mammals at that but very nearly all). I don't think that fish sleep, I'm not sure about reptiles such as snakes. I think that amphibians (at least some of them) sleep. I haven't a clue about insects.

Obviously I did misunderstand your last post and you may be correct in what you say. Unfortunately I don't have time to research this further, although I would be happy to read anything you may find yourself. I can't quite remember where the idea (about consciousness being an awakening from sleep/unconsciousness) came from but I have a vague recollection that it was Daniel Dennett in one of his books, possibly "Darwin's Dangerous Idea". I don't think he discussed it at length though.

BJ

 

[Z]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

You were saying that sleeping 7 hours out of 24 is an evolutionary advantage over sleeping 24 out of 24 - i.e. and animal without any type consciousness such as a bacterium or amoeba. This doesn't make sense to me because only more evolved animals sleep. Birds and mammals sleep, but only mammals dream (and not mammals at that but very nearly all). I don't think that fish sleep, I'm not sure about reptiles such as snakes. I think that amphibians (at least some of them) sleep. I haven't a clue about insects.

However, I would be rather loath to say that fish are never conscious (i.e. sleeping 24 hours a day) compared to a bird, which does sleep. To me, this would imply that consciousness evolved before sleep did, not that sleep is a return to the sort of unconsciousness experienced 24 hours a day by animals that don't sleep.

Actually, many fish sleep, as do snakes and other reptiles. Our Betta, for example, requires some plants in his tank so that he can drape his fins over them while sleeping. I've learned to recognize their form of sleep now, and it is definitely sleep - though not as we envision it, with closed eyes and drool about the mouth, of course.

Some insects sleep, others do not. Generally, the shorter a creature's average lifespan, the less it sleeps, I have observed. I'm sure metabolic requirements must play a part - some creatures, after all, live only to eat, breed, and die - some simple insects, for example. And some live a majority of their lives in a larval stage, and who can say whether such creatures sleep or not?

I also have a problem with your concept that some animals experience continual unconsciuosness - this would imply they lack sensory input and/or thought process. I agree that bacteria and amoeba may not be conscious - they may lack the ability to process data from their senses, or lack any form of 'memory'. But as one moves into the insects, arthropods, arachnids, etc. it becomes more dubious that these creatures, possessed of precise senses and complex thought processing, lack consciousness (in its simplest physical definition). Dreams seem to be a function of only the larger and more complicated brains, those with more comprehensive memory capacity.

 

[rppa]

Yes, so why does this exclude normal dreams? If you're saying ones dream environment is not "real", then what does "real" mean in this context?

I don't believe you addressed my questions attempting to draw out the distinction. Let me try again.

Do you believe that while dreaming, you can be killed by a person who is not in your dream?

If you are being paid to do a job, do you think your employer would be happy to have you dreaming while taking his/her money? Could you do your job while dreaming?

Do you think I could drive you to the store while stretched out snoring and dreaming?

 

[Beth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

I also have a problem with your concept that some animals experience continual unconsciuosness - this would imply they lack sensory input and/or thought process.

Not my concept actually, I was responding to another poster who proposed it. I have the same problems with it that you do.

Dreams seem to be a function of only the larger and more complicated brains, those with more comprehensive memory capacity.

Actually, dreams appear to be a function of the limbic brain. Only mammals dream and the only mammals that do not dream are very ancient mammals such as the platypus. Or at least, that is the case according to a recent book I read. I haven't actually checked the sources cited in it.

 

[Z]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

Actually, dreams appear to be a function of the limbic brain. Only mammals dream and the only mammals that do not dream are very ancient mammals such as the platypus. Or at least, that is the case according to a recent book I read. I haven't actually checked the sources cited in it.

If you could, please relate to me what book that is. Dreams fascinate me - they are my 'pet woo' in that I have actually (I believe) 'dreamwalked' and have experienced lucid, vivid, and self-controlled dreams my entire life. In fact, it is that very element of control that causes me to reject the idea of dream as separate reality that Iacchus and, to a lesser extent, Ian and lifegazer embrace.

Any rate, sounds like a good read... Limbic, huh? Curious...

 

[Interesting Ian]

Placebo
The thing is that consciousness is not very well understood by science yet.

Consciousness lies outside the province of science.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Interesting Ian
The anecdotal evidence pretty well overwhelmingly suggests they are not wholly hallucinatory

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Which particular anecdotal evidence are you referring to?

All of it. How reliable can any single anecdotal report be? It is their accumulative evidential value which is the pertinent point here. A few isolated reports will not be convincing, especially if one is disposed to feel that the evidence for consciousness being a product of the brain is overwhelming. I prefer reading about the accounts prior to 1975 when Moody published "life after life" and first introduced the term "NDE" (prior to then they were subsumed under death-bed visions where people actually died). The reports are likely to be more reliable -- or should we say less unreliable -- given that the vast majority of people were not familiar with this phenomenon before this time (indeed skeptics rejected their existence until the 1980's).

 

[Interesting Ian]

BTW, it seems blind people do occasionally dream of vision, though congenitally blind people generally don't understand that this is what they are experiencing. After all, someone who has never seen lacks the ability to associate experience with language to TELL us that they have 'seen' within the dream. [/B]

WOW! You're claiming that people who are congenitally blind can sometimes actually see in their dreams?!

 

[Interesting Ian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

Some insects sleep, others do not. Generally, the shorter a creature's average lifespan, the less it sleeps, I have observed.

I sleep a lot -- does that mean I'll live for a long time?

 

[Interesting Ian]

I don't believe you addressed my questions attempting to draw out the distinction. Let me try again.

Do you believe that while dreaming, you can be killed by a person who is not in your dream?

If you are being paid to do a job, do you think your employer would be happy to have you dreaming while taking his/her money? Could you do your job while dreaming?

Do you think I could drive you to the store while stretched out snoring and dreaming?

Why are you asking facile questions?

 

[Interesting Ian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

If you could, please relate to me what book that is. Dreams fascinate me - they are my 'pet woo' in that I have actually (I believe) 'dreamwalked' and have experienced lucid, vivid, and self-controlled dreams my entire life. In fact, it is that very element of control that causes me to reject the idea of dream as separate reality that Iacchus and, to a lesser extent, Ian and lifegazer embrace.

Any rate, sounds like a good read... Limbic, huh? Curious...

I'm saying dreams are a separate reality? I don't even know what that means.

 

[Beth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Qualia in Lucid Dreams

If you could, please relate to me what book that is. Dreams fascinate me - they are my 'pet woo' in that I have actually (I believe) 'dreamwalked' and have experienced lucid, vivid, and self-controlled dreams my entire life. In fact, it is that very element of control that causes me to reject the idea of dream as separate reality that Iacchus and, to a lesser extent, Ian and lifegazer embrace.

Any rate, sounds like a good read... Limbic, huh? Curious...

The book was called "A General Theory of Love" by Thomas Lewis, Fari Amini and Richard Lannon. However, there was only part of one chapter that discussed dreaming. I did find that part fascinating.

Beth

 

[Placebo]

From zaayrdragon
Dreams fascinate me - they are my 'pet woo' in that I have actually (I believe) 'dreamwalked' and have experienced lucid, vivid, and self-controlled dreams my entire life

I assume you mean dreamwalking to be your pet woo. Correct me if I'm wrong
By dreamwalking, do you mean a OBE?
Out of interest, what are your reasons for believing it to be genuinely out of your body? (I'm not attacking, just asking . This topic often comes up in discussions regaring lucid dreaming.)

From Interesting Ian
Consciousness lies outside the province of science

Wow. Could you let us know where you obtained this information?
Many notable people seem to disagree with you: http://www.sci-con.org/history.html
They call it 'The scientific study of consciousness'.
There's even a society dedicated to it: http://www.cognitivesciencesociety.org/contact.html
Keep in mind that cognition is 'The mental process of knowing, including aspects such as awareness, perception, reasoning, and judgment'

Your opinion may perhaps be influenced by this?

It is only in the early 20th century that it became a scientific taboo

As Robin said in another thread:

From Robin, in another thread
By the way, how do you determine what is beyond the purview of science? Is there a great stone tablet somewhere that sets out these limits? I thought that the only criteria was that if something is at least indirectly observable and in some way measurable then it is within the purview of science.

From Interesting Ian
All of it. How reliable can any single anecdotal report be?

Indeed, I was not asking for a singular example, but rather the multiple sources you had in mind.
You seem to have indicated some in your reply all the same.

From Interesting Ian
I'm saying dreams are a separate reality? I don't even know what that means.

Could you clear up what exactly you do believe?
Do you believe in OBE as being genuinely out of body for example?
I'm always interested to hear opinions on it.

 

[Z]

Consciousness lies outside the province of science.

And your reason for stating this is...?

Seems that consciousness lies well within the province of science. Science has jurisdiction over that which exists, and since we know consciousness exists, science may study it.

I prefer reading about the accounts prior to 1975 when Moody published "life after life" and first introduced the term "NDE" (prior to then they were subsumed under death-bed visions where people actually died). The reports are likely to be more reliable -- or should we say less unreliable -- given that the vast majority of people were not familiar with this phenomenon before this time (indeed skeptics rejected their existence until the 1980's).

One of the few things you've said I can agree with - though ALL anecdotal evidence should be taken lightly at best. Certainly, as is the case with UFO sightings, once someone popularizes the idea, everyone seems to experience it.